On Thu, 2013-02-14 at 13:13:54 +0100, Miha Valencic wrote: > On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 1:01 PM, Noel Jones <njo...@megan.vbhcs.org> wrote: > > HOLD acts at the message level, not the recipient level. > > If one recipient of a multi-recipient message is put on HOLD, all > > recipients of that message will be affected. > > I see. I believe the HOLD is better suited to our scenario as a > temporary reject and this (HOLDing messages for all recipients if one > matches) is acceptable.
I do not understand your response; the HOLD action is not a temporary reject. Anyway, my involvement earlier in the thread is for others who might chance upon this chain in the archives, and prefer the alternative (and IMHO more robust) approach. -- Sahil Tandon
