On Mon, 08 Feb 2010 12:24:06 -0500, Jameson Rollins wrote:
> I don't think that this is exactly correct. The quoting is interpreted
> by the shell in order to construct a single string that is then passed
> as an argument to the program.
The command line distinguishes, but the constructed query
The changes are:
- The notmuch-test was split into several files (t000?-*.sh).
- Removed helper functions which were moved to test-lib.sh
- Replaced every printf with test_expect_success.
- Replaced $NOTMUCH with notmuch (test-lib.sh sets $PATH appropriately)
- Test commands chained with && (test-l
This removes Git specific things from the test-lib.sh and adds helper
functions for notmuch taken from Carl's notmuch-test script. README is
also slightly modified to reflect the current state.
Signed-off-by: Michal Sojka
---
test/Makefile |1 +
test/README | 12 +-
test/t000
Git uses a simple and yet powerfull test framework, written in shell.
The framework is easy to use for both users and developers so I thing
it would help if it is used in notmuch as well.
This is a copy of Git's test framework from commit
b8bba419250711a69e09e7648e5c991f4847a127.
Signed-off-by: M
On Thursday 04 of February 2010 21:50:18 Carl Worth wrote:
> The test suite is still extremely rudimentary. Here are some things I'd
> like to improve about it:
I converted the actual version of notmuch-test to git test framework.
The result is in the followup patches.
I'd like to know opinion of
On Saturday 06 of February 2010 22:45:32 Carl Worth wrote:
> On Sat, 6 Feb 2010 11:40:18 +0100, Michal Sojka
> wrote:
> > It is straightforward to convert your current test script to Git's
> > framework. If you are interested I'll do it.
>
> Yes, I'd be quite interested in seeing that. Thanks fo
On Sat, 9 Jan 2010 06:18:10 +1100, "Bart Bunting" wrote:
> Hi all,
Hi Bart, welcome to notmuch!
> If however the word 'grandfather' appears in a citation then an incremental
> search through the buffer won't find it.
>
> If the citation is expanded then things work as expected.
>
> I don't thi
ttachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/attachments/20100208/94bb5b2c/attachment.pgp>
On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 13:47:45 +0100, Pablo Oliveira wrote:
> Hello all,
Olá Pablo! Bem-vindo a notmuch!
> I heard about notmuch some weeks ago and I'm already liking it
> a lot. At first I was a little disapointed by the slow tagging,
> but that was fixed by Kan-Ru's great patch for Xapian. I ha
splaying a single ' ' character when
there's no full name available? I think that might solve the problem for
most people.
-Carl
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/attachments/20100208/39ab6e5f/attachment.pgp>
On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 16:34:18 -0800, Keith Packard wrote:
> This makes it easier to see folders with messages.
> Eliding empty folders is togged with the 'e' binding.
>
> Signed-off-by: Keith Packard
Thanks for the patches, Keith!
These are all very useful, and I've pushed all three...
> lib/
ertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
...except that on this last one I only pushed changes to notmuch.el. ;-)
-Carl
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://notmuc
On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 13:41:35 +0800, Kan-Ru Chen wrote:
[... no detailed commit message ...]
I've pushed this change now. It looked to me like the previous changes
in this series were made obsolete by the patches from David that I just
pushed. Let me know if I'm wrong about that and there's anyth
nd there's anything more I
should pick up from this series.
-Carl
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/attachments
> On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 16:09:06 -0400, da...@tethera.net wrote:
> > On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 09:47:02 +0800, Kan-Ru Chen wrote:
> > > I like this idea, but this patch hides all citations larger than the
> > > threshold. I'd like to see limited lines of citations been displayed.
> >
> > Since you ask ni
part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/attachments/20100208/ba86d6f2/attachment.pgp>
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Spaeth
---
test/notmuch-test | 13 +
1 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/test/notmuch-test b/test/notmuch-test
index 2e5eb24..adc9f24 100755
--- a/test/notmuch-test
+++ b/test/notmuch-test
@@ -534,6 +534,19 @@ printf " Restore wit
The sequential identifiers have the advantage of being guaranteed to
be unique (until we overflow a 64-bit unsigned integer), and also take
up half as much space in the "notmuch search" output (16 columns
rather than 32).
This change also has the side effect of fixing a bug where notmuch
could blo
The sequential identifiers have the advantage of being guaranteed to
be unique (until we overflow a 64-bit unsigned integer), and also take
up half as much space in the "notmuch search" output (16 columns
rather than 32).
This change also has the side effect of fixing a bug where notmuch
could blo
be fixed. It produces unexpected behavior with
confusing results.
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/20100208/5168e42c/attachment.pgp>
the shell, and should therefore be
interpreted as such by notmuch.
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/20100208/a273d807/attachment-0001.pgp>
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Spaeth
---
TODO |9 -
notmuch.1 | 29 -
notmuch.c | 24 +---
3 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)
diff --git a/TODO b/TODO
index bdfe64c..86cbf74 100644
--- a/TODO
+++ b/TODO
@@ -114,15 +1
Integrate and make use of the notmuch_parse_date() function in date.c that is
being called by the new MaildateValueRangeProcessor in lib/database.cc
Thanks to keithp for donating the date parser for achieving this in a nice way.
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Spaeth
---
lib/Makefile.local |1 +
l
This is not used yet in this commit but will be the return value in case the
date parser gets handed invalid dates.
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Spaeth
---
lib/database.cc |2 ++
lib/notmuch.h |3 +++
notmuch-new.c |1 +
3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a
From: Keith Packard
Here's some code which further improves date parsing by allowing lots of
date formats, including things like "today", "thisweek", ISO and US date
formats and month names. You can separate two dates with .. to make a
range, or you can just use the default range ("lastmonth" is
The sequential identifiers have the advantage of being guaranteed to
be unique (until we overflow a 64-bit unsigned integer), and also take
up slightly less space in the "notmuch search" output (20 columns
rather than 32).
This change also has the side effect of fixing a bug where notmuch
could bl
The sequential identifiers have the advantage of being guaranteed to
be unique (until we overflow a 64-bit unsigned integer), and also take
up slightly less space in the "notmuch search" output (20 columns
rather than 32).
This change also has the side effect of fixing a bug where notmuch
could bl
In order to not let this bitrot, I just rebased my dateparser branch to
current cworth master and split up the patches in a nicer way.
I made sure that every commit compiles. Let me know if there are things
that should be handled in a different way.
find the git branch here:
http://github.com/spae
On Mon, 08 Feb 2010 18:35:44 +0100, Jed Brown wrote:
> On Mon, 08 Feb 2010 12:24:06 -0500, Jameson Rollins
> wrote:
> > I don't think that this is exactly correct. The quoting is interpreted
> > by the shell in order to construct a single string that is then passed
> > as an argument to the pro
On Mon, 08 Feb 2010 12:24:06 -0500, Jameson Rollins
wrote:
> I don't think that this is exactly correct. The quoting is interpreted
> by the shell in order to construct a single string that is then passed
> as an argument to the program.
The command line distinguishes, but the constructed query
On Fri, 5 Feb 2010 23:48:03 + (UTC), Olly Betts wrote:
> On 2010-02-05, Jameson Rollins wrote:
> > Hey, folks. I've been noticing some strange behavior of notmuch search
> > results for strings containing '[]'. Here are some searches for some
> > exact strings in messages subjects:
>
> The
This removes Git specific things from the test-lib.sh and adds helper
functions for notmuch taken from Carl's notmuch-test script. README is
also slightly modified to reflect the current state.
Signed-off-by: Michal Sojka
---
test/Makefile |1 +
test/README | 12 +-
test/t000
The changes are:
- The notmuch-test was split into several files (t000?-*.sh).
- Removed helper functions which were moved to test-lib.sh
- Replaced every printf with test_expect_success.
- Replaced $NOTMUCH with notmuch (test-lib.sh sets $PATH appropriately)
- Test commands chained with && (test-l
Git uses a simple and yet powerfull test framework, written in shell.
The framework is easy to use for both users and developers so I thing
it would help if it is used in notmuch as well.
This is a copy of Git's test framework from commit
b8bba419250711a69e09e7648e5c991f4847a127.
Signed-off-by: M
On Thursday 04 of February 2010 21:50:18 Carl Worth wrote:
> The test suite is still extremely rudimentary. Here are some things I'd
> like to improve about it:
I converted the actual version of notmuch-test to git test framework.
The result is in the followup patches.
I'd like to know opinion of
On Saturday 06 of February 2010 22:45:32 Carl Worth wrote:
> On Sat, 6 Feb 2010 11:40:18 +0100, Michal Sojka wrote:
> > It is straightforward to convert your current test script to Git's
> > framework. If you are interested I'll do it.
>
> Yes, I'd be quite interested in seeing that. Thanks for y
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Spaeth
---
test/notmuch-test | 13 +
1 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/test/notmuch-test b/test/notmuch-test
index 2e5eb24..adc9f24 100755
--- a/test/notmuch-test
+++ b/test/notmuch-test
@@ -534,6 +534,19 @@ printf " Restore wit
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Spaeth
---
TODO |9 -
notmuch.1 | 29 -
notmuch.c | 24 +---
3 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)
diff --git a/TODO b/TODO
index bdfe64c..86cbf74 100644
--- a/TODO
+++ b/TODO
@@ -114,15 +1
Integrate and make use of the notmuch_parse_date() function in date.c that is
being called by the new MaildateValueRangeProcessor in lib/database.cc
Thanks to keithp for donating the date parser for achieving this in a nice way.
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Spaeth
---
lib/Makefile.local |1 +
l
This is not used yet in this commit but will be the return value in case the
date parser gets handed invalid dates.
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Spaeth
---
lib/database.cc |2 ++
lib/notmuch.h |3 +++
notmuch-new.c |1 +
3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a
From: Keith Packard
Here's some code which further improves date parsing by allowing lots of
date formats, including things like "today", "thisweek", ISO and US date
formats and month names. You can separate two dates with .. to make a
range, or you can just use the default range ("lastmonth" is
In order to not let this bitrot, I just rebased my dateparser branch to
current cworth master and split up the patches in a nicer way.
I made sure that every commit compiles. Let me know if there are things
that should be handled in a different way.
find the git branch here:
http://github.com/spae
42 matches
Mail list logo