Re: RFS(2): autoreply - A safe, rate-limited auto-responder
In article <41FE4A02.8050902@thecsl.org> csacca@thecsl.org writes:
>At first glance autoreply looks very much like just another vacation
>clone, but it takes the behavior of vacation and takes it to another
>lever. The notable differences between autoreply and vacation are:
>
> * As opposed to vacation that is per-user replys, autoreply can
> reply with many different messages via a procmail recipe
You can call vaction with different messages via a procmail recipe.
> * It remembers who it has replied to recently, and won't reply to
> them again within a specified interval
Standard vacation feature.
> * It has a list of addresses that it will not respond to
> (MAILER-DAEMON, majordomo, listserv, etc)
I think this is a standard vacation feature, but if not would be trivial
to add using procmail.
> * It examines headers, checking them for mailing lists, and does not
> reply if it determines the mail is from a mailing list
If vaction isn't doing this good enough, file a wishlist bug
(preferable with patch.)
> * In case these features are insufficient autoreply also has a rate
> limiter so that it will not send more than a specified amount of
> replies in a given time. The rate and interval are both
> configurable.
If vaction isn't doing this good enough, file a wishlist bug
(preferable with patch.)
In other words, this looks like yet another vaction clone by someone who
didn't bother to read the vacation man page. At least it sound like it
might not be another bad clone of vacation.
--
Blars Blarson blarson@blars.org
http://www.blars.org/blars.html
With Microsoft, failure is not an option. It is a standard feature.
Reply to: