On Mon, 28 Jan 2008, Phil Pennock wrote:
| On 2008-01-26 at 17:08 +0000, Luke Sheldrick wrote:
| > However to reply to groups, I have subscribed to using this method, means
| > the mail has to come from that address. The way I am doing it, is to setup a
| > new imap account in my email software. However this is getting all a bit
| > much :P
|
| A whole new account, instead of delivering to a shared folder which you
| subscribe to? Seems excessive.
Just to recap, we're discussing list posting with an automatic per-list
"send" address (outgoing mail).
My understanding is Luke means "account" in the MUA sense, which, for less
feature-laden MUAs, is probably the only way to achieve multiple "send"
addresses. I imagine each of these "accounts" connects to the IMAP server
with same username/passwd, but could be wrong.
Either way, I understand the reasons others have given that this sort of
thing may be best done in the MUA. As Jethro says, pine will definitely
do this with its rules/roles features. But lots of MUAs won't, and some
of those that do probably involve a less-than-succinct GUI. Those of us
who prefer proper text configs, and operate a more-or-less personal mail
server, may well feel an Exim solution is attractive...
I've been thinking about doing this myself, but haven't gotten round to
working out the details. Phil - your suggestion is really helpful as a
starting point - thanks.
| Address rewriting, with a string expansion based on the recipient.
| Failed expansions cause the rewrite to just be ignored. You want to do
| this per-recipient, rather than trying to resolve rules about multiple
| recipients in a list; however, this has the effect of "leaking" the
| non-subaddressed email address to all recipients that you reply to, and
| then any subsequent replies from them will include the non-subaddressed
| form too.
I see the problem. Perhaps just as well to use the per-list address for
direct replies too. Haven't fully thought thru all the consequences yet...
| max_rcpt = 1
| headers_rewrite = [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL
PROTECTED]/etc/mail/subaddress-maps/[EMAIL PROTECTED] f
| return_path = [EMAIL PROTECTED]/etc/mail/subaddress-maps/$1}{$value}fail}
May not need to change the return_path - in most cases mangling the From:
header (as used for access control by most lists) will be sufficient.
--
## List details at http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/
