On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 08:20:48 -0700, Carl Worth <cwo...@cworth.org> wrote:
> Thanks for this patch, James! It's especially nice to have the fix come
> in with additions to the test suite as well.

Thanks for including a test suite I could add to!

> I did split up the commit so the addition to the test suite happens
> first. That way it's easy to test the test itself, (verifying that it
> fails before the fix, and then passes after the fix).

Your choice. I prefer putting them in the same commit to be more
self-documenting, and then using the capabilities of my VCS to verify
the change if i desire.

> I also added a few documentation and other cleanups as follow-on
> commits. Hopefully, they don't change the logic at all, but make things
> easier to understand.
> So that's all pushed.

Great, thanks.

> Then, I started implementing support for retroactively storing
> thread_ids for non-existing messages references in already-existing
> messages. It took me perhaps too long that a change like that, (while
> useful), is too invasive for the current 0.2 release, and not essential
> for this particular feature.

This would fix up threads for all existing messages? Probably a good
thing to have, but not that important to me. In my case I can always
open the bug in my browser if I want to see the full conversation.

> So I've postponed that part at least. I hope to make a database-schema
> upgrade a key part of a release in a couple of cycles, (for this
> feature and for "list:" and "folder:").

Cool, I look forward to it.


notmuch mailing list

Reply via email to