"Todd A. Jacobs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Jason R. Mastaler wrote: > > > Well, I'm not sure TMDA will ever be a full procmail replacement, as > > that's not really its charter. It's only due to Tim's overenthusiasm > > <wink> that TMDA's filtering language is as powerful as it is.
Well, I will take credit for the parsing code, but the language design has been a cooperative effort over on the tmda-devel list. It wouldn't be near as nice as it is without the insight and suggestions of various people over the last year+. > And it truly is pretty good. I wonder, though: would it be difficult to > allow the no-bounce-for-lists to be a configurable option? That might be a > more palatable solution than simply allowing it willy-nilly. I'm uncomfortable with a configuration option, because it's just too "global". Two other possibilities are an option to the 'bounce' action: from [EMAIL PROTECTED] bounce=no_really or a brand new action: from [EMAIL PROTECTED] dude_youre_gettin_a_bounce Of course, we'd use something a little more meaninful but I'm too tired to ponder serious options. Anyhow, you get the picture. Either of these would allow you to override the default auto-response handling without turning it off completely. The explicitness is good, IMHO, because it reminds you each time you do it that you may be annoying a list admin. Tim _____________________________________________ tmda-users mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://tmda.net/lists/listinfo/tmda-users
