Re: Fwd: [ANNOUNCE] : Filters patch against 1.2.0 [e.allaud@wanadoo.fr]

[Emmanuel <e allaud wanadoo fr>]

On 2001.09.26 09:57 Brian Stafford wrote:
[SNIP] 
> I consider the syntax of the config file highly relevent which is why I'm
> banging the drum for Sieve.  A well designed syntax for the file means
> that
> it is easy to program specialised editors for it (GUI or not). 
> Commonality
> of syntax means that multiple third parties can code implementations of
> it.
> This can only be good.
> 
> > The issues that I think should be discussed:
> > 1. should balsa filters be stored, or have an export option to sieve 
> > syntax, to allow easy upload to remote mail servers?
> 
> I feel the best solution is to implement sieve directly.  Export as sieve
> is a second best solution, however it might be a good transitional
> approach.

Yes I read (really quickly) the rfc describing sieve, and think that it's
doable to export balsa filters as sieve scripts. We can even store them in
the config file as sieve scripts (but with restrictions for now, that would
mean that they should not be edited by hand in order to be usable by Balsa,
that could be corrected later).

> Given that sieve editors are starting to appear (try a freshmeat search!)
> perhaps it should be considered whether filter editing should be part of
> balsa at all.  "Edit Filters ..." should exec the external program ;)
> perhaps?

Hum I was thinking (not in near future :) to code a gtk dialog box capable
of editing sieve scripts (that way you can reuse it anywhere you need it).

> > 2. how can we stimulate usage of sieve server-side mail filtering?
> 
> MTA based filtering can be done only at the MTA which delivers mail for
> a domain.  Therefore a sieve capable version of "deliver" programs that
> sendmail et al. use to perform final delivery (procmail is in this
> category)
> is the correct solution here.
> 
> > I think 
> > availability of server side filtering is crucial.
> 
> Agree absolutely.  This facility is absolutely essential and should never
> be omitted from a system (sadly it usually is).
> 
> > I use it now presently 
> > to keep my primary inbox free from discussion list messages etc. I know
> I 
> > could use balsa soon-to-be-available filtering to hide bulk mail from
> the 
> > inbox but the fact is, I cannot always use balsa to access my mail for 
> > various reasons.
> > 

In all these discussions you don't mention the problem of filtering a
(typically huge) mailbox to retrieve a subset of messages satisfying
criteria to look for something precise without going mad :)
This is the use I had in mind when beginning the filter patches. I think
that it can be done using Sieve syntax (where are the message flags saved,
ie replied/new/flagged ?), I have to check that more thoroughly.
Anyway for near future due to limitations of my implementation of filters,
I think the best I can do is export sieve scripts :(

Opinions :)

Bye
Manu