Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-sieve-imap-sieve-09.txt
Barry Leiba <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.mta-filters |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CALaySJLevN_8AHgDOmJm+-p07B=FwvYvTGRJsDksXRH_vb=0fQ@mail.gmail.com> |
>> Just a question, how are we going to handle the approval of the following >> IMAP extension? >> >> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-imapmove-command-01 >> >> Intuitively, I would say that adds a new imap.cause item called "MOVE" and I >> guess at some point this (or something else) would need to be documented. >> Would it still be possible for the editor to hammer it into the current >> yet-to-be-RFC imapsieve document if IMAP MOVE (somehow) makes it to RFC >> first? > > IMAP Sieve is already in the Editor's Queue, so it's surely ahead of IMAP MOVE. Right, and I've addressed this in my AD review of the MOVE extension document: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/imapext/current/msg04712.html ------------------------------ -- Section 4 -- Add a new Section: 4.5. IMAP Events in Sieve MOVE applies to IMAP events in Sieve [reference] in the same way as COPY does. Therefore, MOVE can cause a Sieve script to be invoked with the imap.cause set to "COPY". Because MOVE does not cause flags to be changed, a MOVE command will not result in a script invocation with the imap.cause set to "FLAG". The [reference] for IMAP Events in Sieve is draft-ietf-sieve-imap-sieve-09, which should be in the RFC Editor queue any day now (so it won't hold this document up). ------------------------------ ...with follow-up here: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/imapext/current/msg04714.html ------------------------------ Ned's comment: > I think this is the right thing to do, but I have to ask: Given the timing > of the Sieve in IMAP spec we could define a new "MOVE" cause in the base > specification if we wanted to. Do we want to do this? I thought about that when I wrote the above, and I can't find a good reason to distinguish MOVE from COPY in imap-sieve. It also wouldn't be as simple as just defining a new cause: we'd have to decide whether only the target-mailbox script is run, or whether the source-mailbox script is run as well. My sense is that it's not an important distinction, and we don't want to go there. ------------------------------ Barry _______________________________________________ sieve mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sieve