+
+(306) 09-Nov-04 M Make the search type partial-lsearch*@ be useful
+
+At present, it treats the whole key as a domain for the partial search, then
+does the *@ thing. A more sensible plan would be something like:
+
+ user@company.com
+ *@company.com
+ user@*.company.com
+ *@*.company.com
+ *
+
+That is, try the local part and * at each of the partial domain values.
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+(307) 24-Nov-04 S Check the syntax of Message-ID: header lines
+
+This could be added to "verify=header_syntax" or, if the incompatibility is
+felt to be too great, an additional condition, or a sub-option, could be added.
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+(308) 24-Nov-04 S Add $body_longlinecount and $header_longlinecount
+
+These variables would hold the number of physical lines in the body and header
+that were longer than 998 bytes. This would be fiddly to implement because of
+the way Exim currently reads the input. It isn't just a trivial patch.
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+(309) 01-Dec-04 S/M Queue runners should get locks before forking
+
+If a queue-runner opened the -D file and took out the lock before forking, it
+would waste fewer resources if the message was already being delivered. But how
+often would this actually matter in practice?
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+(310) 06-Dec-04 S After "personal" save what matched
+
+The idea is to save the email address that actually was found in the message
+in a variable so it can be used (e.g. as the From: address in an autoreply).
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+(311) 07-Dec-04 ? More flexible SMTP response codes
+
+The requestor wanted to be able to specify, for example, 551 in an ACL deny
+instead of 550, and also vary the defer code. The first digit, however, should
+remain fixed. In addition to main codes, enhanced status codes (RFC 2034) were
+requested. (As far as I can tell, they have never been highly popular.)
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+(312) 10-Dec-04 ? Shadow remote transports
+
+Unless a lot of work is done, this would be restricted to another remote
+transport. A similar effect could therefore be achieved with "shadow_hosts"
+which are like fallback_hosts but which operate on success.
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+--- HWM 312 ------------------------------------------------------------------