http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3816
------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-23 22:39 ------- Subject: Re: Add an X-header to know when added a Subject header > Also, I definitely agree with Theo about "no" on kludges. I think my > solution would work fine, you just remove with a slightly looser regular > expression. I'll agree with that. I'm generally against kludges myself, but in this case I question whether what we are talking about is a kludge. To be pedantic about the definition of "rewrite_header" would indeed mean that it is a kludge. But it seems clear from observation that what most *users* feel it should mean is "reliably install this markup so I can see it is spam". This clearly isn't the original developer's intent. But standing about 30 feet back on the fence, I can't say I consider the viewpoint to be at all unreasonable. As a maker of a number of commercial products myself, I can say with confidence that the user's viewpoint about how a tool should work or be used will not always agree with the developer's ideas. I've found over the years that it is usually better to at least permit, if not necessarily internally agree with, the user's interpretation of how things should be used. About the only exception is when the user's desires are in complete conflict with the internal architecture. I don't think that really pertains here; this is more a matter of semantics: how strictly or loosely do we interpret the meaning of the word 'rewrite". My personal belief *in this case* would be that we accept that it means "darnit, do whatever you need to do to install this here markup". ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
