On 03/11/2014 03:14 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:

On Mar 11, 2014, at 06:25 PM, Aurelien Bompard wrote:

...

What do you think about all that? Do you agree there's actually an issue there? Any idea how to solve it? For example, make the NonMember rule exit if a member is found amongst the senders (which would simply be equivalent to making it yield to the Member rule). Bad idea?

Ah, an interesting case! My immediate reaction is that nonmember-moderation should do exactly what you suggest: test for both membership and nonmembership. If it's both, then return False as if the action were Action.defer. This should allow the member-moderation rule to take precedence.

Can you think of a reason *not* to do this?

I think that's the right thing to do. In 2.1, a single module does both. Addresses are tested from headers in a defined order, and the first member address found determines the action. Only if no member address is found, are non-member tests done.

I'm not sure about the architecture of the chain of rules, but maybe the member-moderation rule could set a flag in the metadata to tell the nonmember-moderation rule to take no action rather than testing for membership, but this might be a bad idea as it would make the rules order sensitive.

-- Mark Sapiro <mark@msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan