On Tue, 25 Feb 2003, Andreas Aardal Hanssen wrote:
If it does - aren't you free to change not only the info part from the filename, but also the uniq part? If it's a new delivery, you're the delivery agent, and it's your duty to find a good identifier.
Yes!
How about somehow sneaking/encoding the flags into the identifier of the unique part? :p Sounds like a nasty workaround/hack, I admit, but could it work?
The only problem with this idea is that the Maildir spec specifically states "...Do not try to extract information from unique names." In this respect, Binc is on the one hand a MTA and on the other an MUA, but restricted by the spec from communicating with itself.
Here's my suggestion: Do what other MUAs do, when COPYing, create a bogus header
X-BincFLAGS-info: containing the data from the info line, then when moving a mail from new/ to cur/ extract that data (if present) and use it to reconstitute the :info.
The only problem with this scheme is one really has now way of knowing if the header was added by Binc or by the original sender, therefore there is a security concern. A possible workaround would be for each instance of Binc to create a cookie and incorporate that into the info field so it can validate and/or strip the header when moving into cur/.
C=)
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
If software were really an engineering field, we would learn as engineers
do to avoid tools and methods that persistently lead to serious problems.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Caskey <caskey*technocage.com> /// TechnoCage Inc.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Heuer's Law: Any feature is a bug unless it can be turned off.
