Request for comments 3

[Alex Broens]

On 7/22/2007 7:25 PM, Julian Field wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> 
> 
> Alex Broens wrote:
>> On 7/22/2007 6:38 PM, Julian Field wrote:
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Alex Broens wrote:
>>>> On 7/22/2007 6:06 PM, Julian Field wrote:
>>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Alex Broens wrote:
>>>>>> On 7/22/2007 5:13 PM, Julian Field wrote:
>>>>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>>>>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How about this instead?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> SpamAssassin Rule Actions = rulename=>action, rulename=>action, ....
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> the "rulename"s are the names of individual SpamAssassin rules, 
>>>>>>> and the "action"s are list those in "Spam Actions". To specify 
>>>>>>> multiple actions for a rule, you specify the rulename several 
>>>>>>> times, with one action for each. Expressions with SpamAssassin 
>>>>>>> rules are done with SpamAssassin meta-rules. If the rule hits, 
>>>>>>> the action is taken.
>>>>>> Yeah. sounds real nice!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'll write a few examples of meta-rules so you can see how to 
>>>>>>> write them in spam.assassin.rules.conf or wherever they need to 
>>>>>>> go. Mr Kettler, can you correct me on this please?
>>>>>> may I suggest the name:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> sa.actions.rules.conf?
>>>>> Why would it need a conf file of its own? I see it just as a 
>>>>> (potentially quite long) list of rulenames and actions to take.
>>>>> Or are you thinking of a conf file that looks like
>>>>> rulename   list-of-actions
>>>>> rulename   list-of-actions
>>>>> ....
>>>>> I'm not in favour of a separate conf file, it looks a bit over the 
>>>>> top.
>>>> let me see if I got it right.
>>>>
>>>> (cheap example)
>>>>
>>>> should be all in one line:
>>>>
>>>> AXB_RCVD_ZOOBSEND To:blah1 at domain.tld DELETE|QUARANTINE|FORWARD: 
>>>> blah22domain.tld
>>> Where in my spec above did I mention From or To? You can put a 
>>> ruleset on this configuration setting, so you could create rules in a 
>>> ruleset that looked like (for example)
>>> To:     user1 at domain1.com     forward user2 at domain2.com store deliver
>>> FromOrTo:     domain3.com     store delete
>>> From:     user3@*     deliver header "X-Wibble: yes"
>> It sounded like you were asking/requesting for comments but if its 
>> spec is nailed, I guess the extra actions also go down the drain.
>> (the ones which I believe would have really added value to the feature)
> What were your extra actions you suggested? I couldn't understand your 
> examples. Its spec isn't nailed by any means. "forward" already exists.

pls see below:

AXB_RCVD_ZOOBSEND From:blah3 at domain.tld 
DELETE|QUARANTINE|FORWARD|REDIRECT: blah33domain.tld

In my understanding:
FORWARD modifies the "From"
REDIRECT doesn't  so the sender is the original

*Your* FORWARD equals *my* REDIRECT
how to name the modified sender "Forward" ? dunno

do I make any sense?

Alex