# Armazene uma revisão real para edições com período de carência longo

**URL:** <https://meta.discourse.org/t/store-a-real-revision-for-large-grace-period-edits/81614>\
**Category:** Feature\
**Created:** [Fevereiro 26, 2018, 11:43pm UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/store-a-real-revision-for-large-grace-period-edits/81614 "2018-02-26T23:43:08Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![sam](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/meta/user_avatar/meta.discourse.org/sam/32/102149_2.png) [@sam](https://meta.discourse.org/u/sam)\
**Post date:** [Fevereiro 26, 2018, 11:43pm UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/store-a-real-revision-for-large-grace-period-edits/81614/1 "2018-02-26T23:43:09Z")

</div>

I think a very awesome change would be to calculate “amount of diff” prior to deciding if an edit requires storage of a real revision or not.

If you changed 5 letters in a post, sure it can be a “grace period” edit with no revision stored. If you deleted 10 paragraphs it should never be considered a “grace period edit” and a revision should be stored.

I suggest:

`grace_period_edits_max_chars_changed` default to: 30

Any larger changes deserve to be tracked anyway and can be vectors for abuse, so this would be a great change on 2 levels.

1. It protects end users from “mistake” nuking own post with a ninja edit (cause a revision will be stored)

2. It protects the community from “bad actors” that abuse ninja edits and starts surfacing them.

Can not think of any downsides really.

---

_[View the full topic](https://meta.discourse.org/t/store-a-real-revision-for-large-grace-period-edits/81614)._