On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 23:18:07 +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
>
> I'm still marking it as RFC. It works for me, but patch 1 might be deemed
> unacceptable.
>
Hi Jani;
Is just because it add a function to the library that you think this
might be problematic? I don't think we are super-dogmatic about
On 2011, Oct 31, at 19:25 , Daniel Schoepe wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 16:43:22 +0100, bnt wrote:
>> I am not too proficient with the patch utility. Is there some kind of
>> scheduled git commits timeline?
>
> Unfortunately, there's a huge number of outstanding patches at the
> moment, so it's
On Tue, 25 Oct 2011 22:42:33 +0200, Daniel Schoepe wrote:
>. There is also a number of patches that have been reviewed by
> long-term contributors, but are then seemingly forgotten (I can find
> some concrete examples of this, if this claim is in doubt).
Maybe you can tag those patches as "notm
On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 11:28:45 -0300, David Bremner wrote:
> Maybe you can tag those patches as "notmuch::reviewed" using nmbug? [1]
> My idea is that
>
>notmuch search tag:notmuch::patch and tag:notmuch::reviewed
>
> should give a kind of consensus set of "ready to go" patch sets.
Don't for
Rebased to current master.
Previous version:
id:"1307016220-17509-1-git-send-email-pie...@praet.org"
Discussion:
id:"1317660447-27520-1-git-send-email-schno...@schnouki.net"
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/ma
Adds a new test that checks for the presence of 'gpg',
and adds that test as a prereq to all subsequent tests
that rely on GnuPG.
This causes tests with unmet dependencies to be skipped.
---
test/crypto | 33 +++--
1 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
Adds a new test that checks for the presence of 'emacs',
and adds that test as a prereq to all subsequent tests
that rely on Emacs.
This causes tests with unmet dependencies to be skipped.
---
test/crypto | 17 ++---
1 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/t
Adds a new test that checks for the presence of 'emacs',
and adds that test as a prereq to all subsequent tests
that rely on Emacs.
This causes tests with unmet dependencies to be skipped.
---
test/emacs | 65 ---
1 files changed, 35 inse
Adds a new test that checks for the presence of 'emacs',
and adds that test as a prereq to all subsequent tests
that rely on Emacs.
This causes tests with unmet dependencies to be skipped.
---
test/emacs-large-search-buffer |9 +++--
1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff
On Mon, 3 Oct 2011 18:47:14 +0200, Thomas Jost wrote:
> Here it is: a rebased version of Pieter's patch series adding prereqs for the
> emacs and crypto tests [1], and Dmitry's patches for running emacs inside
> screen
> in the test suite [2]. (Please note that this one also includes fixes to
>
On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 08:55:09 -0700, Jameson Graef Rollins
wrote:
> On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 11:28:45 -0300, David Bremner wrote:
> > Maybe you can tag those patches as "notmuch::reviewed" using nmbug? [1]
> > My idea is that
> >
> >notmuch search tag:notmuch::patch and tag:notmuch::reviewed
> >
On Mon, 3 Oct 2011 18:47:17 +0200, Thomas Jost wrote:
> [...]
The SCREEN prereq would preferrably be added in a separate commit.
Also, you appear to have given *every* test the EMACS+GPG prereq,
while only the ones using `emacs_deliver_message' require EMACS.
Peace
--
Pieter
___
On Mon, 3 Oct 2011 18:47:18 +0200, Thomas Jost wrote:
> [...]
Nice catches @
- "Sending a message via (fake) SMTP"
- "Hiding message following HTML part"
(though I think the latter test wasn't there yet when I submitted my
patch series)
New "issues":
- The SCREEN prereq would preferra
On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 08:18:18 -0700, Jameson Graef Rollins
wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 15:49:03 +0200, Daniel Schoepe wrote:
> > On Tue, 5 Jul 2011 20:33:00 +0200, Pieter Praet wrote:
> > > To allow for expansion whilst keeping everything tidy and organized,
> > > move all defcustom/defface va
On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 20:57:59 +0100, Pieter Praet wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Oct 2011 18:47:18 +0200, Thomas Jost wrote:
> [...]
> - @ "Verify that sent messages are saved/searchable (via FCC)":
>
> This doesn't need an EMACS prereq.
> [...]
My mistake, scrap this one.
Without Emacs, there would
On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 20:56:17 +0100, Pieter Praet wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Oct 2011 18:47:17 +0200, Thomas Jost wrote:
> [...]
>
> Also, you appear to have given *every* test the EMACS+GPG prereq,
> while only the ones using `emacs_deliver_message' require EMACS.
>
> [...]
Again, my mistake. All subse
On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 08:49:10PM +0100, Pieter Praet wrote:
Rebased to current master.
Previous version:
id:"1307016220-17509-1-git-send-email-pie...@praet.org"
Discussion:
id:"1317660447-27520-1-git-send-email-schno...@schnouki.net"
Thanks for the nice work!
I want to share one thing wh
On Tue, 1 Nov 2011 20:49:11 +0100, Pieter Praet wrote:
> -test_expect_success 'emacs delivery of signed message' \
> +test_expect_success GPG 'emacs delivery of signed message' \
Hi, Pieter and Thomas. Thanks for all the work on this, but I have one
issue. Is there a way we can do this without
On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 16:55:03 -0300, David Bremner wrote:
> One thing I think we need to clarify a bit is are we tagging whole
> threads or individual messages in the database. Because of the way
> notmuch search works, I had been tagging whole threads with
> notmuch::pushed (effectively to "mute"
On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 14:27:53 -0700, Jameson Graef Rollins
wrote:
> I'm not sure why this is needed, since it seems to me that the whole
> argument for tagging entire threads is that the individual messages are
> *not* distinguishable from the thread.
The problem is that "notmuch search foo and
On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 20:22:58 -0300, David Bremner wrote:
> The problem is that "notmuch search foo and not bar" will return all
> threads containing a message satisfying "foo" and a message satisfying
> "not bar". This makes
>
> notmuch search tag:notmuch::patch and not notmuch::pushed
>
On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 14:44:29 -0700, Jameson Graef Rollins wrote:
> Hi, Jani. Thanks for working on this. This should also be valuable for
> vim users.
Thanks for your interest! :)
> In order to push forward with this, though, I think we really need to
> have a complete unit test for this new f
On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 23:18:07 +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
>
> I'm still marking it as RFC. It works for me, but patch 1 might be deemed
> unacceptable.
>
Hi Jani;
Is just because it add a function to the library that you think this
might be problematic? I don't think we are super-dogmatic about
On 2011, Oct 31, at 19:25 , Daniel Schoepe wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 16:43:22 +0100, bnt wrote:
>> I am not too proficient with the patch utility. Is there some kind of
>> scheduled git commits timeline?
>
> Unfortunately, there's a huge number of outstanding patches at the
> moment, so it's
ined as something like "cd $HOME/.nmbug && git
log -- tags/$(echo $id | sha1sum -)"
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 315 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://not
e.
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/attachments/2001/7b32ebeb/attachment.pgp>
Rebased to current master.
Previous version:
id:"1307016220-17509-1-git-send-email-pieter at praet.org"
Discussion:
id:"1317660447-27520-1-git-send-email-schnouki at schnouki.net"
Adds a new test that checks for the presence of 'gpg',
and adds that test as a prereq to all subsequent tests
that rely on GnuPG.
This causes tests with unmet dependencies to be skipped.
---
test/crypto | 33 +++--
1 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
Adds a new test that checks for the presence of 'emacs',
and adds that test as a prereq to all subsequent tests
that rely on Emacs.
This causes tests with unmet dependencies to be skipped.
---
test/crypto | 17 ++---
1 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/t
Adds a new test that checks for the presence of 'emacs',
and adds that test as a prereq to all subsequent tests
that rely on Emacs.
This causes tests with unmet dependencies to be skipped.
---
test/emacs | 65 ---
1 files changed, 35 inse
Adds a new test that checks for the presence of 'emacs',
and adds that test as a prereq to all subsequent tests
that rely on Emacs.
This causes tests with unmet dependencies to be skipped.
---
test/emacs-large-search-buffer |9 +++--
1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff
On Mon, 3 Oct 2011 18:47:14 +0200, Thomas Jost
wrote:
> Here it is: a rebased version of Pieter's patch series adding prereqs for the
> emacs and crypto tests [1], and Dmitry's patches for running emacs inside
> screen
> in the test suite [2]. (Please note that this one also includes fixes to
:patch and tag:notmuch::todo and
tag:notmuch::reviewed
to get an "integrators queue" (Well, the more like an unordered pile
than a queue. One problem at a time).
David
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 315 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/attachments/2001/02ba5282/attachment.pgp>
On Mon, 3 Oct 2011 18:47:17 +0200, Thomas Jost
wrote:
> [...]
The SCREEN prereq would preferrably be added in a separate commit.
Also, you appear to have given *every* test the EMACS+GPG prereq,
while only the ones using `emacs_deliver_message' require EMACS.
Peace
--
Pieter
On Mon, 3 Oct 2011 18:47:18 +0200, Thomas Jost
wrote:
> [...]
Nice catches @
- "Sending a message via (fake) SMTP"
- "Hiding message following HTML part"
(though I think the latter test wasn't there yet when I submitted my
patch series)
New "issues":
- The SCREEN prereq would preferr
On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 08:18:18 -0700, Jameson Graef Rollins wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 15:49:03 +0200, Daniel Schoepe
> wrote:
> > On Tue, 5 Jul 2011 20:33:00 +0200, Pieter Praet
> > wrote:
> > > To allow for expansion whilst keeping everything tidy and organized,
> > > move all defcustom/def
On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 20:57:59 +0100, Pieter Praet wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Oct 2011 18:47:18 +0200, Thomas Jost
> wrote:
> [...]
> - @ "Verify that sent messages are saved/searchable (via FCC)":
>
> This doesn't need an EMACS prereq.
> [...]
My mistake, scrap this one.
Without Emacs, there wo
On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 20:56:17 +0100, Pieter Praet wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Oct 2011 18:47:17 +0200, Thomas Jost
> wrote:
> [...]
>
> Also, you appear to have given *every* test the EMACS+GPG prereq,
> while only the ones using `emacs_deliver_message' require EMACS.
>
> [...]
Again, my mistake. All su
not?"
-alip
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/attachments/2001/bfaa19ca/attachment-0001.pgp>
every call of every testing function?
jamie.
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/attachments/2001/5b88e7b1/attachment.pgp>
On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 16:55:03 -0300, David Bremner wrote:
> One thing I think we need to clarify a bit is are we tagging whole
> threads or individual messages in the database. Because of the way
> notmuch search works, I had been tagging whole threads with
> notmuch::pushed (effectively to "mute"
te resolution of the issue.
Here I think we agree.
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 315 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/attachments/2001/b42c4053/attachment.pgp>
tagging in general) but I
still think we should try.
jamie.
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/attachments/2001/543f2f66/attachment.pgp>
43 matches
Mail list logo
