https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6057
--- Comment #7 from Karsten Bräckelmann <[email protected]> 2009-02-05 07:56:56 PST --- Dennis, this bug is about the description being too vague and low on information, which should be enhanced by adding some details. It is however *not* about explaining and dissecting the given example RE. Seriously, that whole section of the docs is almost exclusively for admins. It's taken for granted that an admin who is going to write custom rules *does* understand REs already. Let alone more esoteric stuff like redirector_pattern, which frankly rarely only needs to be used by anyone. Moreover, IMHO adding references to RE tutorials is out of the scope of the entire SA documentation, more so for this specific option. Any reference if at all should be 'man perlre' anyway. ;) If you need help understanding the example, the users mailing list is the appropriate place to ask. Bugzilla is for handling and tracking bugs -- not usage questions. FWIW, your dissection of the example RE isn't correct. One hint: (?:foo) is for grouping without creating backreferences. See the note in the description about backreferences being forbidden -- cause it's used to extract the one embedded, actual target URI. [1] That all said, I'm still kind of wondering why you are poking at redirector_pattern in the first place. Any need for that, or would a simple rule do? [1] Which maybe could be added to the description, just to explain why other backreferences are not allowed. Oh, any why does FF spell-checking not know the word "backreference"? ;) -- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug.
