[exim] Sieve Standards and the Exim Environment

Michael,

What the standard says and what it means in a specific context is often
two different things. There are many standards that are Unix standards
that refer to rile like this:

/this/is/a/file/path

But when ported to windows it became:

c:\this\is\a\file\path

Its the same thing - but a different environment.

In the context of sieve being part of Exim then there needs to be some
changes as to what things mean when it's used as a filter rather than a
stand alone delivery product running externally.

I would agree that "fileinto" would mean to deliver it to a folder. But
- if it specified a router name instead of a folder then why couldn't
Exim be smart enough to say the "fileinto" really means a "destination"
and that destination could mean a file or a router?

What does "keep" mean. If seive is stand alone then that means you have
to do something with it so the default action is to stick it in the
Inbox. But as part of Exim "keep" might mean do nothing with it and let
the next router do the job.

Nothing I'm proposing changes in any way what the syntax look like or
breaks anything. I don't think it violates the RFC to interpret that
"keep" might actually do something a little different as long as it
keeps the message. Or that "fileinto" might specify a router that does
the storage. I maintains the "spirit" of the command.

Michael Haardt wrote:

>On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 02:06:09PM -0700, Marc Perkel wrote:
>
>
>>I'm wanting to use the seive router to be used for exceptions and have
>>it fall through to the next routers if the seive doesn't do anything.
>>
>>
>
>Sieve, as defined by RFC 3028, requires that if the filter does not
>do anything, an implicit 'keep' is executed, that is the same as
>'fileinto "inbox"'. The RFC is pretty clear about what 'fileinto'
>does:
>
> The "fileinto" action delivers the message into the specified folder.
>
>If you were into reading too many laws, you could probably say that at
>your place, delivery into the inbox folder means to pass on to the next
>router. :) I am not sure if the router could still fail if $address_file
>is "inbox", but even if it could do that, I don't suggest it. The good
>thing about Sieve is being a standard. If it does not fit, then don't
>use it. I suggest an Exim filter for such applications.
>
>Personally, I don't like the implicit keep being defined the way it is,
>because it forbids using the filter for aliases without assigned storage.
>Too late to change the standard, though.
>
>Michael
>
>
>