Leo Baltus schreef:
Op 04/08/2009 om 11:15:39 +0200, schreef Stephan Bosch:
What exactly would you like to do with this? I am asking to make sure
that there are no other features needed, like for instance the index
extension mentioned in RFC5260. That would definitely need changes in
the Si
Op 04/08/2009 om 11:15:39 +0200, schreef Stephan Bosch:
> Leo Baltus wrote:
>> Op 04/08/2009 om 10:46:59 +0200, schreef Stephan Bosch:
>>> Leo Baltus wrote:
Hi Stephan,
I would very much like to start using sieve as a procmail replacement.
The lack of date handling in sieve is h
Leo Baltus wrote:
Op 04/08/2009 om 10:46:59 +0200, schreef Stephan Bosch:
Leo Baltus wrote:
Hi Stephan,
I would very much like to start using sieve as a procmail replacement.
The lack of date handling in sieve is holding me from doing so.
I think you are aware of rfc5260, may I suggest it a
Op 04/08/2009 om 10:46:59 +0200, schreef Stephan Bosch:
> Leo Baltus wrote:
>> Hi Stephan,
>>
>> Op 03/08/2009 om 21:40:49 +0200, schreef Stephan Bosch:
>> [snip]
>>> On the more positive side, I have implemented support for the new
>>> mailbox extension (RFC 5490), which provides the means to te
Leo Baltus wrote:
Hi Stephan,
Op 03/08/2009 om 21:40:49 +0200, schreef Stephan Bosch:
[snip]
On the more positive side, I have implemented support for the new
mailbox extension (RFC 5490), which provides the means to test whether a
mailbox exists.
[snap]
I would very much like to start usin
Hi Stephan,
Op 03/08/2009 om 21:40:49 +0200, schreef Stephan Bosch:
[snip]
> On the more positive side, I have implemented support for the new
> mailbox extension (RFC 5490), which provides the means to test whether a
> mailbox exists.
[snap]
I would very much like to start using sieve as a pr
