Re: procmail vs. exim (was: Re: Proposed change for subscriptions...)

[Dave Sherohman <esper@sherohman.org>]

On Sat, Mar 18, 2006 at 10:07:11AM -0700, s. keeling wrote:
> I'll wager that procmail is one of the better documented utilities out
> there, considering all those writing about its usage.  The tiny-tools
> project even supplies an emacs syntax checker mode for rc files

That's beside the point, IMO.  All the documentation and syntax
checkers in the world aren't going to change the fact that procmail's

:0:
* ^From: AntiSpam UOL <.*@uol.com.br>
/dev/null

(stolen from one of Gene Heskett's recent posts) is more cryptic and
requires more effort for the average speaker of English to understand
than exim's equivalent

if $h_From contains "AntiSpam UOL" then
  seen finish
endif

Granted, the exim version still requires a little bit of learning to
fully understand or to create new rules based on it, but most seem to
find it easier than procmail syntax.

-- 
The freedoms that we enjoy presently are the most important victories of the
White Hats over the past several millennia, and it is vitally important that
we don't give them up now, only because we are frightened.
  - Eolake Stobblehouse (http://stobblehouse.com/text/battle.html)