I’m just setting up and testing my first virtualmin server and I’m really liking it.
One feature I’m really wanting is a basic, easy to use server side filtering option. I’ve previously used sieve for filtering on dovecot with the ui that comes via a plugin in squirrelmail. This worked well and is easy enough and has lots of options that a basic user can understand.
I know there is filtering in usermin, but the only two real options for users are an exact match header (which is often hard to get or match on), or a regular expression, which they’ll never understand.
So it there a way to simplify these options in usermin, possibly add more details to the header choices, like Reply-To, and to do a "contains" type match as an option?
Or has anyone else setup sieve filtering along with the existing dovecot/procmail combination that is already there? There is a dovecot sieve plugin which I’d use, but I wouldn’t want to break any of the other options like the procmail setup that is in place.
I lack a good answer for you – I agree, the current email filtering options are limited if you don’t do regexes… and even outside of regexes, you can only filter based on one criteria (an email from firstname.lastname@example.org and with a subject of “foo” – that’s not currently possible).
My recommendation would be to file a feature request in the Support Tracker to get Jamie’s thoughts on it – maybe he has either suggestions of an alternative way of doing things, or maybe there’s a way he can add what you’re interested in to Usermin.
That code above is missing the slash characters, so replace each "r" with a forward slash then "r".
For anyone interested, you can do partial "contains" type matching just by doing a :
So it’s easy enough to explain to newbies how that works. Hope this helps someone else.
Thanks, I will do that. I’ve added an item here :
for anyone else that wants this and wants to vote on it.
One thing then that someone may be able to help me with : How would you do a regex match to match on a header contains type match. Would this work :
Obviously I’d need to escape any . characters in the search string. Is there anything obvious there I’m missing?