Fwd: [sieve] Looking for Working Group Chairs to finish some IMAP and Sieve work
While I do not think we have anyone appropriate as a chair of this group
as requested, we should actively participate in whatever comes of this
review of IMAP and Sieve.
Concerning Sieve, I am a firm believer that most email filtering should
be done at the server level, and Sieve is the obvious protocol for that.
If we were to rewrite email filtering in Thunderbird, I would make
robust Sieve support to be an important part of that rewrite.
:rkent
-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: [sieve] Looking for Working Group Chairs to finish some IMAP
and Sieve work
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2017 11:17:22 +0100
From: Alexey Melnikov alexey.melnikov@isode.com
To: 'imapext@ietf.org' imapext@ietf.org, Sieve mailing list
sieve@ietf.org
Hi,
I am looking for chairs for soon to be formed
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-extra/. Please send me
directly your nominations and self nominations. If you never been a WG
chair and have questions about what are WG chair obligations and
authority, please don't hesitate to drop me a note.
Thank you,
Alexey, ART Area Director
sieve mailing list
sieve@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sieve
It,s a good idea.
Just a question is that rfc is use/can work with G and M ?
https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5228.txt
http://sieve.info/
Le 16/08/2017 à 20:24, R Kent James via Maildev a écrit :
While I do not think we have anyone appropriate as a chair of this
group as requested, we should actively participate in whatever comes
of this review of IMAP and Sieve.
Concerning Sieve, I am a firm believer that most email filtering
should be done at the server level, and Sieve is the obvious protocol
for that. If we were to rewrite email filtering in Thunderbird, I
would make robust Sieve support to be an important part of that rewrite.
:rkent
-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: [sieve] Looking for Working Group Chairs to finish some IMAP
and Sieve work
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2017 11:17:22 +0100
From: Alexey Melnikov alexey.melnikov@isode.com
To: 'imapext@ietf.org' imapext@ietf.org, Sieve mailing list
sieve@ietf.org
Hi,
I am looking for chairs for soon to be formed
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-extra/. Please send me
directly your nominations and self nominations. If you never been a WG
chair and have questions about what are WG chair obligations and
authority, please don't hesitate to drop me a note.
Thank you,
Alexey, ART Area Director
sieve mailing list
sieve@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sieve
Maildev mailing list
Maildev@lists.thunderbird.net
http://lists.thunderbird.net/mailman/listinfo/maildev_lists.thunderbird.net
On 8/16/2017 1:24 PM, R Kent James via Maildev wrote:
While I do not think we have anyone appropriate as a chair of this
group as requested, we should actively participate in whatever comes
of this review of IMAP and Sieve.
Concerning Sieve, I am a firm believer that most email filtering
should be done at the server level, and Sieve is the obvious protocol
for that. If we were to rewrite email filtering in Thunderbird, I
would make robust Sieve support to be an important part of that rewrite.
I second that notion. I will point out that Sieve is rather more
freeform than our filtering logic, but being able to support Sieve
filters is valuable, especially if/when sieve support is better
integrated with IMAP.
--
Joshua Cranmer
Thunderbird and DXR developer
Source code archæologist
On 16.08.2017 22:36, Bardot Jérôme via Maildev wrote:
It,s a good idea.
Just a question is that rfc is use/can work with G and M ?
Managing server-side filters certainly is a good feature, I've got on my
wishlist for quite a while. (especially when using multiple MUAs)
But there're some things to consider:
- cross-server filtering (eg. moving from server A to B)
- moving filters between server and client (eg. when moving from
one server to another). - maybe running filters on both sides (eg. if some filter should
match mails from multiple servers) - the UI should reflect all these things.
By the way: I'm currently having problems w/ filters moving between
servers: sometimes they don't catch in (seems about 10% of the traffic),
but I haven't seen any pattern behind that. Any idea ?
For huge amount of filters, managing them (via UI) can be quite complex.
For example, I move out maillists to their own boxes (often on a
different) server. Archives are also sorted by mailbox, yet again on
another server. Managing that can be a quite huge task.
And it's not just maillists, but also certain bots (eg. ebay), and their
patterns regularily change, so I have to update the filters.
Therefore I'm thinking about some classification system: have rules for
assigning mails to a class (eg: "maillist/foss/mozilla/tbird") and then
define actions/processing rules for that class (eg. "on inbox move to
server-b:/Inbox/$class, on archive move to server-c:/Archive/$class").
Or even better: add an interface to external filter processors
(eg. something procmail-like).
--mtx