Re: [exim] RFC: bool_lax{} naming

On 2010-06-14 at 20:34 -0400, Dave Lugo wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010, Phil Pennock wrote:
> >
> > Folks,
> >
> > Before 4.73 is released and the name becomes forevermore locked in
> > place, does anyone have any better recommendations on the name for the
> > new bool_lax{} expansion condition?
> >
>
> bool_softfail ?

But it never fails. It's always true/false, where soft-fail to me means
"defer".

-Phil