Jameson Rollins writes:
> If folks have suggestions for disambiguating tag names that don't
> themselves create further confusion on some other front, then I'm
> inclined to just go with the simplest and most straightforward tag name.
Are persistent tags required here? The original question at
he way to go.
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/20110228/b27589c3/attachment.pgp>
rd tag name.
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/20110228/2d63f36c/attachment.pgp>
me the tags to minimize that kind of confusion?
--dkg
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 1030 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL:
<http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/attachments/20110228/16d53341/attachment.pgp>
Hey Jamie,
On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 16:27:35 -0800, Jameson Rollins wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 01:00:08 +0100, Xavier Maillard
> wrote:
> > What is the easy way to switch to your codebase from notmuch mainline ?
> > I mean, what exact commands do we need to type in order to use your
> > branch
available
URL:
<http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/attachments/20110228/44071b68/attachment.pgp>
r a decryption succeeds?
--dkg
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 1030 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL:
<http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/attachments/20110228/1bc77be0/attachment.pgp>
on/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/attachments/20110228/6a2c2577/attachment.pgp>
ilable
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/attachments/20110228/f8089c58/attachment.pgp>
I too am now running the crypto branch and find it quite amazing. The
one feature I would like added, though, is some face color or
auto-tagging in the search buffer for mail with encrypted mime parts.
It seems like this could be achieved with notmuch effort (by someone
notme) by adding similar
Hey Jamie,
On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 16:27:35 -0800, Jameson Rollins
jroll...@finestructure.net wrote:
On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 01:00:08 +0100, Xavier Maillard xav...@maillard.im
wrote:
What is the easy way to switch to your codebase from notmuch mainline ?
I mean, what exact commands do we need to
On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 10:41:48 +, Darren McGuicken
mailing-notm...@fernseed.info wrote:
If feedback is needed here then likewise, I've been running the crypto
branch since it was made available. The only strangeness I've seen was
that which was reported in
On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 13:59:54 -0500, Daniel Kahn Gillmor
d...@fifthhorseman.net wrote:
But: what does the signed tag mean? i wouldn't want to necessarily
conflate these four ideas:
These are good points, Daniel. However, I had actually just been
thinking of something much simpler, along the
Jameson Rollins jroll...@finestructure.net writes:
If folks have suggestions for disambiguating tag names that don't
themselves create further confusion on some other front, then I'm
inclined to just go with the simplest and most straightforward tag name.
Are persistent tags required here?
14 matches
Mail list logo
