Barry Warsaw writes: > It's a valid complaint. What I've suggested in the past is that a > rule can do some *nondestructive* processing of a message before it > makes its decision. The rule would either throw out the results of > the processing (possibly leading to duplication of work) or would > cache the results, e.g. in the metadata dictionary (possibly > leading to a rather large pickle/in-memory data).
Yeah, I was afraid you'd say something like that. This could be quite expensive in terms of duplicating work for encryption, but I guess we cross that bridge when we come to it. _______________________________________________ Mailman-Developers mailing list Mailman-Developers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-developers Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-developers%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-developers/archive%40jab.org Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
