Re: [sieve] Sieve deleteheader and :count match type

NED+mta-filters@mauve.mrochek.com Tue, 17 January 2017 16:50 UTC

Return-Path: <NED+mta-filters@mauve.mrochek.com>
X-Original-To: sieve@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sieve@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C32591279EB for <sieve@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Jan 2017 08:50:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.101
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.101 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-3.199, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HVPEpGVcWzFo for <sieve@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Jan 2017 08:50:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mauve.mrochek.com (mauve.mrochek.com [68.183.62.69]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EA99A129592 for <sieve@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Jan 2017 08:50:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dkim-sign.mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01Q9S9R3JK4W000EBT@mauve.mrochek.com> for sieve@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Jan 2017 08:49:42 -0800 (PST)
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=us-ascii; Format=flowed
Received: from mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01Q9Q42VM1B400004H@mauve.mrochek.com> (original mail from NED@mauve.mrochek.com) for sieve@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Jan 2017 08:49:39 -0800 (PST)
From: NED+mta-filters@mauve.mrochek.com
Message-id: <01Q9S9R24CP800004H@mauve.mrochek.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 08:47:39 -0800 (PST)
In-reply-to: "Your message dated Tue, 17 Jan 2017 12:20:13 +0000" <b5c375c0-6617-4cf1-8721-5f19d39ed3f1@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
References: <82102421-fed0-13eb-f557-83c878618a04@andrew.cmu.edu> <01Q9RHX13ZFM00004H@mauve.mrochek.com> <b5c375c0-6617-4cf1-8721-5f19d39ed3f1@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
To: Arnt Gulbrandsen <arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sieve/y7NwPSV5ESpOZV-jnkYglSD3ifY>
Cc: sieve@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [sieve] Sieve deleteheader and :count match type
X-BeenThere: sieve@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: SIEVE Working Group <sieve.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sieve>, <mailto:sieve-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/sieve/>
List-Post: <mailto:sieve@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sieve-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sieve>, <mailto:sieve-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 16:50:37 -0000

> NED+mta-filters@mauve.mrochek.com writes:
> > I also don't think that saying that :count tests perform a preliminary count
> > like :index :last is especially useful - can you think of a case where you'd
> > want to delete all headers of a given type based on how many of them are
> > present? I can't.

> It's far-fetched, but deleting both subject fields if there are two or
> more? I think most people choose to use the first. Choosing to delete both
> isn't entirely unreasonable, though.

I don't really see a case for deleting all of them. Deleting all but one
makes a certain amount of sense, but you can't do that directly with
a single deleteheader action.

> The same applies to other header fields that may occur at most once.

Again, all but one, sure, or maybe appending them to each other. But not
full deletion.

				Ned