On 06/05/16 15:42, Chris Siebenmann wrote: >> - Lose router "unseen" > > We have several routers that use 'unseen = true'. If this is now > considered a bad idea, what's the best mechanism to make copies of a > message on the way through and send them to specific destinations?
A redirect router, with data of $local_part@$domain, <extra_copy_dest> (as to "why considered a bad idea" - functionality duplicated by the above, header-manipulation semantics oddities, delivery error semantics oddities) >> There are other ideas buried in the bugs which are more far-reaching. >> Reducing the number of languages involved in an exim config was one (I >> count: ACL, retries, router-chain, authenticators, exim-filter...). > > If one is going to go for wholesale configuration rewriting, I would > agitate for creating or embedding a real programming language. String > expansion plus carefully ordering routers/ACLs/etc can do a great deal, > but it is not exactly clear and I think it would be quite improved if > you could directly express ACL logic and routing logic. > > (I suppose the modern low-ish-effort version is embedded Lua with > hooks and so on exposed.) Interesting. What do you feel is lacking from ACLs in making them "a real programming language"? Same question for routers? -- Cheers, Jeremy -- ## List details at https://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/
