Robert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Mode '1' seems to be the compromise solution.

I do find it odd to delete the headers and thus lose 
information (making impossible to reconstruct the original 
message), but that is what SpamAssassin itself does.  Munging 
the header names as you suggest (with X-Old- or whatever) to 
preserve them makes more sense to me.

> Tangentially - I'm not sure the numbering scheme makes sense. 
> Or if we should be using flags like that.  They're hard to
> understand without documentation.

I agree.  Maybe "strip" (or "delete"), "munge" (or "modify"), 
"keep" (or "preserve"), in place of the numbers.

-- 
Keith C. Ivey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Washington, DC

Reply via email to