On Wed, 2004-01-14 at 15:58, Eli wrote:
> If a re-implementation of how headers are added and removed is going to be
> done, I'd actually opt in for the ability to have them done inline, rather
> than remove first, then add. It would not only remove the burden of
> remembering all transactions and then processing them later (since you just
> process as you walk the ACL statements and do them as you see them), but it
> would make more sense when people are reading the config file. Also, it
> would give better control, IE I could add a header unconditionally, then,
> later on in the ACL (or in another ACL) I could have a condition which may
> remove that header. If removes THEN adds were the way it was done (like
> routers/transports), then I would never be able to do that, and you would
> probably get a lot of people asking why.
You do need to watch this since routers are a per recipient item, and
acls may also be per recipient items, so the header set you are carrying
will also become per-recipient before it ever gets to the transports.
This could make life very interesting indeed :-
Nigel.
--
[ Nigel Metheringham Nigel.Metheringham@??? ]
[ - Comments in this message are my own and not ITO opinion/policy - ]
