Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-sieve-imap-sieve-09.txt
Stephan Bosch <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.mta-filters |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Op 10/10/2012 10:45 PM, Barry Leiba schreef: >>> 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 I must have missed that one, because I am subscribed to that list. > 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. I agree. Regards, Stephan. _______________________________________________ sieve mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sieve