On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 10:42:48PM +0000, [email protected] wrote: > https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7366 > (In reply to RW from comment #8) > > It's not about anyone seeing them, it's about avoiding name collisions > > between the core rules and local rules. At the moment there's no standard > > way of doing this. Someone people use long prefixes, but these reduce > > readability and bloat meta-rules. And there's no guarantee that someone wont > > pick the same prefix and contribute their rules to core. > > > > L_ seems like the ideal candidate for a reserved prefix. > > Along with __L_ for subrules. > > +1 from me. We can even add build tooling to ensure none such ever get added > to > the base rules.
Guys please continue on list. If you want some L_ policy that's fine. Not something I personally would use. It would seem more productive to actually make spamassassin --lint output info messages (not errors) when rules are redefined. And perhaps add a new tflag "redefine" (suggestions?) to suppress those warnings for intentional redefines.
