Carl Worth yazm??:
> On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 23:09:34 +0200, Ali Polatel wrote:
> > Carl Worth yazm??:
> > > What do you think, Ali? Would an approach like that satisfy the things
> > > you had in mind for hooks?
> >
> > It might, here are some thoughts and questions to help you elaborate:
> >
> >
> We've talked about switching from default tags of "inbox" and "unread"
> to simply having new mail tagged with a "new" tag.
Ohh, please make the standard set of tags for new mail configurable in the
config file. I might want to add different tags for special purposes, like
Carl Worth yazm??:
> On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 13:16:00 +1300, martin f krafft
> wrote:
> > Lua for hooks has the advantage that the hooks can be executed in
> > the context of manipulateable objects. On the other hand, hooks in
> > the style of run-parts directories are more flexible and accessible,
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 23:09:34 +0200, Ali Polatel wrote:
> Carl Worth yazm??:
> > What do you think, Ali? Would an approach like that satisfy the things
> > you had in mind for hooks?
>
> It might, here are some thoughts and questions to help you elaborate:
>
> - How will these scripts manipulate
also sprach Carl Worth [2010.01.15.1200 +1300]:
> > Lua has many advantages over other scripting languages when it
> > comes to integration with a C program. It has a very clean and
> > easy C API, the overhead of running Lua scripts is not noticable
> > among other things.
>
> I've definitely
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 13:16:00 +1300, martin f krafft
wrote:
> Lua for hooks has the advantage that the hooks can be executed in
> the context of manipulateable objects. On the other hand, hooks in
> the style of run-parts directories are more flexible and accessible,
> and could always be invoked
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 13:16:00 +1300, martin f krafft madd...@madduck.net wrote:
Lua for hooks has the advantage that the hooks can be executed in
the context of manipulateable objects. On the other hand, hooks in
the style of run-parts directories are more flexible and accessible,
and could
Carl Worth yazmış:
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 13:16:00 +1300, martin f krafft madd...@madduck.net
wrote:
Lua for hooks has the advantage that the hooks can be executed in
the context of manipulateable objects. On the other hand, hooks in
the style of run-parts directories are more flexible and
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 23:09:34 +0200, Ali Polatel a...@exherbo.org wrote:
Carl Worth yazmış:
What do you think, Ali? Would an approach like that satisfy the things
you had in mind for hooks?
It might, here are some thoughts and questions to help you elaborate:
- How will these scripts
On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 10:47:13 +0200, Ali Polatel wrote:
> Before trying to implement anything I decided to send a mail to the list
> to ask people's opinion.
Hi Ali, welcome to notmuch!
I appreciate you soliciting opinions, but I hope that my answer won't
discourage you. By all means, please
Before trying to implement anything I decided to send a mail to the list
to ask people's opinion.
What's the problem?
===
Notmuch isn't very configurable.
How can Lua integration solve this?
===
Here are initial thoughts on how to integrate Lua
also sprach Carl Worth cwo...@cworth.org [2010.01.15.1200 +1300]:
Lua has many advantages over other scripting languages when it
comes to integration with a C program. It has a very clean and
easy C API, the overhead of running Lua scripts is not noticable
among other things.
I've
12 matches
Mail list logo
