On Tue, 2004-02-24 at 10:08 +0000, Philip Hazel wrote: > I was specifically asked to add sender_on_delivery. I made the point
> about repeating the data, but the requestor insisted that they wanted it
> that way for some reason (probably to do with ease of processing the log
> lines - after all, the <= line could be days ago).
Out of interest, do you happen to recall if did they explicitly _want_
the old data repeated, or would 'return_path_on_delivery' have sufficed
to satisfy them too?
