Re: mostly open issues

[Chris Newman <Chris.Newman@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 11 Nov 1998, Tim Showalter wrote:
> > My understanding of the DRUMS discussion on Resent-* headers is that 
> > they are not to be used for .forward style automatic, unconditional 
> > forwarding, but are supposed to be used for user-initiated forwarding. 
> > I say that Sieve falls into this latter category, and thus Resent-* 
> > headers SHOULD be generated.
> 
> Okay, I'm not sure if I agree with the first half, but I can accept the
> second half in any case.

Actually, I disagree with Randy here.  My take on the DRUMS decision was
that Resent-* headers are for User Agent manual resends.  If Sieve is
running on an IMAP server, then Resent-* headers shouldn't be generated,
IMHO.

> > > 4.  Request: Short-circuit evaluation should be either MAY or MUST, and
> > >     must be discussed in case it matters in the future.
> > 
> > I've implemented them, but I suspect there may be implementation 
> > environments where this is hard to support, and so I don't think we can 
> > require it.
> 
> Really?  Could you provide an example?  I can think of only one, and I
> think it's rather absurd.
> 
> Chris, why shouldn't this be "SHOULD"?  I think SHOULD would be useful
> since I assume short-circuit evaluation will be required by extensions
> that specify tests with side effects, and it's useful from an efficiency
> standpoint.

There is no justification to use SHOULD.  Either programmers can rely on
short-circuit behavior or they can't.  The former is MUST, the latter is
MAY.

		- Chris