http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3661
------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-03-14 13:49 ------- >> In passing, I don't understand the general reluctance to add new rule types. > >The short version is that adding a rule type is pretty non-trivial. So having >multiple rule types which are all basically the same except only different in >small ways (such as use array2 instead of array1) is really a pain and causes >a whole bunch of overhead. however I see Loren's point that adding a new qualifier (like the "something" in "header FOO NameOfHeader:something") is a bad idea, too, from a rule-developer's usability perspective. each qualifier is _really_ a new rule type, just disguised. in that case, adding new rule types can be a good idea -- if we can avoid the overhead of new rule type hashes to track them. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
