https://bugs.exim.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2341
--- Comment #5 from David Carter ---
I'm a bit nervous about running current master (and I would have to rejig my
build scripts).
The deliver.c part of your patch appears to apply cleanly against a vanilla
Exim 4.91 tarball:
patching file src/deliver.c
https://bugs.exim.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2341
--- Comment #6 from Jeremy Harris ---
(In reply to David Carter from comment #5)
> The deliver.c part of your patch appears to apply cleanly against a vanilla
> Exim 4.91 tarball:
> Would that be a useful test?
Yes; please do.
--
You are receiving th
https://bugs.exim.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2341
--- Comment #7 from David Carter ---
Okay, I installed a patched version of Exim 4.91 onto a spare mailhub and
tweaked the delay_warning configuration:
delay_warning = 1h:4h:8h:24h:30d
I then sent 26 test messages to a local account which has run out
https://bugs.exim.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2341
--- Comment #8 from Jeremy Harris ---
Thanks. It seems I'm on the right track; now we need to decide if that is
now too much notification... there's no per-sender tracking on this, it's
per-deferred message, so (as in your test) one sender will get a wa
https://bugs.exim.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2341
--- Comment #9 from David Carter ---
I think that the new behaviour is fine.
Each warning message contains summary information:
The message identifier is: 1gUXhL-0007kL-sO
The date of the message is:Wed, 05 Dec 2018 13:58:43 +
The subjec
On Wed, 5 Dec 2018, admin--- via Exim-dev wrote:
https://bugs.exim.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2341
--- Comment #8 from Jeremy Harris ---
Thanks. It seems I'm on the right track; now we need to decide if that is
now too much notification... there's no per-sender tracking on this, it's
per-deferred me
https://bugs.exim.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2341
Git Commit changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||g...@exim.org
--- Comment #10 from Git Commit ---
On 2018-12-05, Andrew C Aitchison via Exim-dev wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Dec 2018, admin--- via Exim-dev wrote:
>
>> https://bugs.exim.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2341
>>
>> --- Comment #8 from Jeremy Harris ---
>> Thanks. It seems I'm on the right track; now we need to decide if that is
>> now too much notifi
