You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@spamassassin.apache.org by Justin Mason <jm...@jmason.org> on 2005/01/20 21:43:52 UTC
Re: removing the rule-name-length limit (was Re: svn commit: r125722)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Daniel Quinlan writes:
> jm@jmason.org (Justin Mason) writes:
>
> > ah, I didn't post examples of what the new formatting looks like --
> > here it is in "report_safe 1":
>
> The example I posted *was* "report_safe 1", so the new formatting does
> not look like that at all.
hmm. I didn't spot your example -- mistook it for a sig!
I need to figure out why yours looks different...
let me take a look.
> > Now, I can't find any agreement in bugzilla that those limits
> > should have been imposed. ;)
>
> Nice try, but today's code changes are the things that get votes, not
> code changes from 2 years ago...
sure. just pointing it out.
> > our current translations have the following description lengths:
> >
> > German: under 50 chars: 201 too long: 380: 65% too long
> > French: 236 158: 40% too long
> > Dutch: 476 113: 19% too long
> > Polish: 275 107: 28% too long
> >
> > in other words *none* of our translations yet implement the 50 character
> > limit (bug 4007, bug 4040). In bug 4040, Klaus notes that he doubts it's
> > *possible* to bring German descriptions under 50 characters anyway.
>
> I'm more willing to discuss increases to description lengths (given the
> expansion factor of many languages over English) than rule name lengths
> as I think carrying over to two lines does not render reports that
> unreadable. However, I think increasing the rule name length from 22 is
> too much.
>
> If I look at all of the rule name lengths from the custom rule sets
> (including a French one) on the Wiki, 9992 rules have a length of 22 or
> lower and only 16 rules have a length of 23 or 24 (none are longer than
> 24).
>
> > 1. allows German-language 70-character descriptions ;)
>
> German typically requires approximately 25-35% the length of English, so
> changing the limit to 65 or 70 characters would be fine with me.
>
> > 2. allows long enough rule names to support the additional 13 characters
> > that should be added to each rule name in automc (bug ID, comment number,
> > "T_MC_" prefix, and underscores between them, ie.
> > "T_MC_rulename_2243_13"). right now, we avoid this more-or-less by just
> > adding 7 chars, "MC_rulename_9Ac". But still, "make test" and buildbot
> > will fail, if a bug with a rule name of longer than 15 characters in it is
> > mass-checked.
>
> Just ignore the limits for T_ rules. That's fine with me.
OK -- I'm happy to go for:
- relax the description limit to allow 2-line descs
- keep 22-char limit on rulenames
- except for T_-prefix names
That still leaves the problem of a few unreadable rule names, like
FROM_WEBMAIL_END_NUMS6, though. I'd like to relax the rulename
limit a *little* -- 28 chars maybe?
- --j.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh CVS
iD8DBQFB8BgIMJF5cimLx9ARAi8HAJ4vskDkIx1y9WZuGJ8SMOEKrW4g+QCeNie3
tyZbRKefx3bfUAicE79rAeg=
=kgBw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Re: removing the rule-name-length limit (was Re: svn commit: r125722)
Posted by Theo Van Dinter <fe...@kluge.net>.
On Thu, Jan 20, 2005 at 04:53:51PM -0500, Duncan Findlay wrote:
> Sure. IIRC, 22 was somewhat arbitrary, but worked well given the
> maximum length of lines and length of most descriptions.
As I recall, it was 22 for rule name, plus 50 for description == 72. Add in
another couple for spacing, the "*", etc, and you were near the 78/80 length
for which we were aiming.
--
Randomly Generated Tagline:
"The Mets were great in 'sixty eight,
The Cards were fine in 'sixty nine,
But the Cubs will be heavenly in nineteen and seventy."
-- Ernie Banks
Re: removing the rule-name-length limit (was Re: svn commit: r125722)
Posted by Duncan Findlay <du...@debian.org>.
On Thu, Jan 20, 2005 at 12:43:52PM -0800, Justin Mason wrote:
> OK -- I'm happy to go for:
>
> - relax the description limit to allow 2-line descs
> - keep 22-char limit on rulenames
> - except for T_-prefix names
--lint should really be treating these "limits" as suggestions, not
errors. Like "hey, that's a bit long and it might look funny" not
"Your description is too long -- how dare you be so verbose".
That was certainly my intention when I implemented it, at least.
> That still leaves the problem of a few unreadable rule names, like
> FROM_WEBMAIL_END_NUMS6, though. I'd like to relax the rulename
> limit a *little* -- 28 chars maybe?
Sure. IIRC, 22 was somewhat arbitrary, but worked well given the
maximum length of lines and length of most descriptions.
--
Duncan Findlay