Tokio Kikuchi wrote: > >OK, Barry. I've come up with this patch (for the current CVS). >If its OK, I want to start up for the release of 2.1.8a1.
The pass through of the 'hold' action if the message is to -owner seems right to me, but discarding instead of rejecting a 'reject' action if the message is to -owner seems wrong. I think we should not change the disposition for a 'reject' action. The rule can be for lots of purposes, not just spam and if the owner has configured the rule to reject the message, I don't think we should discard it just because it is to -owner and not to the list. I have one idea for 2.1.8a1 before we wrap it up. I'll address that in a separate post. -- Mark Sapiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan _______________________________________________ Mailman-Developers mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-developers Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-developers/archive%40jab.org Security Policy: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp
