On Wed, 16 Feb 2005, Eli wrote:
> Now, on the issue of headers_add and headers_remove. It's a nice idea, but
> should be postponed until such time that we may rework the entire headers
> code for other reasons that have been brought up last year (which Philip is
> aware of).
Another point is that making such a change is a complete change of
philosophy. At the moment, ANY option for any driver may only be
specified once. If this rule is changed, people may (will?) start
expecting to be able to duplicate other options, such as "condition" or
"domains". It is quite a big step to make this global change of
philosophy, so it must be considered in this wider context, not just as
a change to those two options.
> If your sole reason for wanting to use this multiple times is
> for code modularity, use the previously mentioned changes (by using your
> ifdefs inside your headers_add/remove sections), or heck, just write a
> different router for each module and do it that way.
Or write a program/script to generate a configuration file that Exim
likes from your own format configuration file. It would be easy enough
to write a Perl script that reads a pseudo-configuration and combines
multiple settings of headers_add, for example.
> Wishlist requests aren't evil though, don't get me wrong - just don't expect
> everything you ask for when not enough people ask for the same thing. When
> it comes to getting ideas to conception, the more people making the same
> request pushes development.
Indeed. Even wishlist items that never get implemented are sometimes
useful, because they stimulate thoughts about the problems, and may
cause a different solution to emerge.
--
Philip Hazel University of Cambridge Computing Service,
ph10@??? Cambridge, England. Phone: +44 1223 334714.
Get the Exim 4 book: http://www.uit.co.uk/exim-book
