[rt-users] Autoresponder control
jesse at fsck.com
Fri Jul 14 10:51:52 EDT 2000
If a regular user submits two, ten or five hundred tickets in a week,
they should get two, ten or five hundred receipts. I agree that we
need better bounce control, but vacation-style squelching wouldn't work.
On Fri, Jul 14, 2000 at 12:39:46PM +0200, Tobias Brox wrote:
> > I could easily write up some safety stuff in procmail (which is
> > called before stripmime and rt anyway, in our configuration),
> > but there doesn't seem to be a way to have RT spit the ticket
> > number back out to procmail. Is it possible to create a ticket
> > submission address that doesn't respond, and still have one
> > that does, in case of suspected loops?
> > Also -- Jesse, Tobias, you guys need some good logic for the
> > RT2 autoresponder code?
> IMO best idea is to do like vacation is doing - limit the system so it
> only sends one autorespond of a given template to a given email at a given
> week. This would both stop loops and stop annoying the people who
> frequently submit tickets. I've made #TODO-hooks in the code for
> this. Jesse thinks this should wait until post-2.0, but I don't think it
> is a much complicated thing to do.
> The traditional idea is to prevent autoreply at mails with a header line
> matching /^Precedence: (junk|bulk)$/i - that's already implemented both in
> RT1 and RT2, but the implementation is a bit better in RT2.
> Spell checkers are for wimps
> (please send feedback on all typos)
> rt-users mailing list
> rt-users at lists.fsck.com
jesse reed vincent --- root at eruditorum.org --- jesse at fsck.com
pgp keyprint: 50 41 9C 03 D0 BC BC C8 2C B9 77 26 6F E1 EB 91
And I'm told we do share some common rituals. Our "flame war" is apparently
held in person in their land and called "project meeting".
-Alan Cox [on "Suits"]
More information about the rt-users