Jameson Graef Rollins <jroll...@caltech.edu> writes: > On Sat, Sep 14 2019, David Bremner <da...@tethera.net> wrote: >> Jameson Graef Rollins <jroll...@caltech.edu> writes: >> >>> Can we have notmuch auto-apply a tag, like the "encrypted" and "signed" >>> tags, that indicates mail has been mangled in this way? I'm feeling >>> somewhat morally opposed to just silently fixing mail that's been broken >>> by bad/irresponsible actors on the net. We need to keep pushing on MS >>> to fix this issue globally, so I for one would like to be reminded if >>> I'm still being affected by this. >> >> It's side point, but it should rather be a property than a tag if we do >> something like that. In hindsight I think "auto tags" were probably a >> design mistake, since they are (easily) mutable by users. > > Right, sorry, yes it should be a property. I agree. > > Any reason not to move "encrypted" and "signed" to be properties as > well?
I guess it would require some client code to be adapted. I'm not sure what really relies on those tags other than ad hoc searches. d _______________________________________________ notmuch mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org https://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch