multiple machine tagging

2010-05-20 Thread Jesse Rosenthal
On Thu, 20 May 2010 09:25:42 +0100, David Edmondson wrote: > What's the current state of the art in merging tags from multiple > machines? About the same, I think. I had started trying to figure out a way to do a smarter dump (only dumping changed info) for my distributed tagging/bug-tracking

multiple machine tagging

2010-05-20 Thread David Edmondson
. dme. -- David Edmondson, http://dme.org -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/attachments/20100520/4028c

Re: [PATCH] emacs: Allow the display of absolute dates in the header line.

2010-05-20 Thread Dirk Hohndel
On Wed, 19 May 2010 07:44:18 +0100, David Edmondson d...@dme.org wrote: Add `notmuch-show-relative-dates' to control whether the summary line in `notmuch-show' mode displays relative dates (e.g. '26 mins. ago') or the full date string from the message. Default to `t' for compatibility with the

multiple machine tagging

2010-05-20 Thread David Edmondson
What's the current state of the art in merging tags from multiple machines? In my own case the contents of the mail store can be considered identical on the different machines. Automated tagging is mostly fine - it can just happen on each of the machines. Any hand-added tags are a problem,

Re: multiple machine tagging

2010-05-20 Thread Jesse Rosenthal
On Thu, 20 May 2010 09:25:42 +0100, David Edmondson d...@dme.org wrote: What's the current state of the art in merging tags from multiple machines? About the same, I think. I had started trying to figure out a way to do a smarter dump (only dumping changed info) for my distributed