Re: [SAtalk] _REPORT_ format

2003-08-22 Thread Andrew A. Vasilyev
Let me revive an old theme: On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 11:03:31AM -0400, Theo Van Dinter wrote: > On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 05:29:46PM +0400, Andrew A. Vasilyev wrote: > > I get your point of view, but why didn't you put > > the rule name at the end of former line in parenthesis. > > And everyo

Re: [SAtalk] _REPORT_ format

2003-07-08 Thread Theo Van Dinter
On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 05:01:09PM +0400, Andrew A. Vasilyev wrote: > This format is even worse: 1. No "xx points, yy required"; > 2. 1-st line breaks identation; 3. all other lines are shifted > to 9-th position, not 3-rd as in 2.60-- versions :(( Well, #1 you can fix, which also fixes #2.

Re: [SAtalk] _REPORT_ format

2003-07-08 Thread Andrew A. Vasilyev
On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 03:55:48PM +0100, Sean Cardus wrote: > I've done just that... In PerMsgStatus.pm I've changed lines 2214-2216 > to: > $self->{test_logs} .= sprintf ("* % 2.1f -- %s%s [%s]\n%s", > $score, $area, $desc, > $r

Re: [SAtalk] _REPORT_ format

2003-07-02 Thread Theo Van Dinter
On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 05:29:46PM +0400, Andrew A. Vasilyev wrote: > I get your point of view, but why didn't you put > the rule name at the end of former line in parenthesis. > And everyone would be satisfied :-)) There's already a bugzilla ticket open about this. I think just putting the

RE: [SAtalk] _REPORT_ format

2003-07-02 Thread Sean Cardus
On 02 July 2003 14:30, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 09:21:21AM -0400, Matt Kettler wrote: >> I've always considered the "no rule names report format" a "duh" >> feature of SA, so I for one am glad for the change. > > I get your point of view, but

Re: [SAtalk] _REPORT_ format

2003-07-02 Thread Andrew A. Vasilyev
On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 09:21:21AM -0400, Matt Kettler wrote: > I've always considered the "no rule names report format" a "duh" feature of > SA, so I for one am glad for the change. I get your point of view, but why didn't you put the rule name at the end of former line in parenthesis. An

Re: [SAtalk] _REPORT_ format

2003-07-02 Thread Matt Kettler
At 11:42 AM 7/2/03 +0400, Andrew A. Vasilyev wrote: One can see which is more reader-friendly :-)) True, but I'd argue the old format is useless, regardless of readability. It doesn't list the names of the rules, just the descriptions, making the information it provides very limited in value. (

[SAtalk] _REPORT_ format

2003-07-02 Thread Andrew A. Vasilyev
Hi! Could the developers be so kind to explain the reason for changing the _REPORT_ template output format? Old: X-Spam-Report: -17.3 points, 5.0 required; * 1.0 -- From: does not include a real name * 0.4 -- BODY: HTML is missing "table" close tags * 0.3 -- BO