Sieve problem

[John A. Tamplin]

Rob Siemborski wrote:

>I don't see why the bytecode version can't just have an "include" opcode,
>followed by a string (stringlist?) of other files.
>  
>
I didn't know if the bytecode was structured such that you can just 
include the bytecode, or if more work would be required to munge them 
together.

>Now you've associated scripts with folders, instead of addresses.  Does
>this mean that if I (personally) fileinto shared.folder, and shared.folder
>has a script, does it run?  Can you fileinto between two shared folders?
>What about setting \Seen from a sieve script?  Do you have to set it for
>everyone (that'd be really expensive in Cyrus).  How does vacation
>interoperate (what happens if I fileinto a folder which has a script which
>calls vacation, but I've already sent this guy a vacation notice)?
>
>Among others....  (and I'm sure Larry can point out obvious ones I'm
>missing)
>  
>
I would say that only folders not in the user hierarchy can have 
scripts, and that they are only invoked on delivery rather than fileinto 
(so they are still associated with addresses, just ones that don't 
correspond to a particular user).  I personally would just say ignore 
vacation and setting seen flags on a non-user folder.

The main thing I would like is to have filters for sorting mail that is 
delivered directly to a shared mailbox into subfolders of that mailbox, 
and I wouldn't use those functions on a shared folder anyway.  Not 
having vacation on a folder that isn't associated with a single user 
doesn't seem to be much of a loss.

-- 
John A. Tamplin
Unix Systems Administrator