Amadeusz Żołnowski writes:
> Not necessarily. The recommended setup of notmuch for afew is that
> "notmuch new" tags messages with "new" tag only. Then afew processes all
> messages with "new" tag. So if it is a spam, then it gets "new" removed
> and "spam" added. A spam message at any time doesn
Tomi Ollila writes:
> That is interesting in a sense that I could not reproduce. I think I know
> exactly why this happens: notmuch-view-raw-message creates read-only buffer
> which is not removed after message is resent: re-running
> notmuch-view-raw-message on same message will `get-buffer-crea
Hi David,
dm-list-email-notm...@scs.stanford.edu writes:
> The one thing I'm still unclear on is whether afew is running on the
> client of the server.
It is run as a post-hook, i.e. after "notmuch new", so it's on the
server.
> I guess the other option is that your maildir.synchronize_flags fal
On Mon, Aug 31 2015, David Bremner wrote:
> Tomi Ollila writes:
>
>>
>> emacs -q -L $PWD/emacs -l emacs/notmuch.el -f notmuch --eval '(progn (setq
>> notmuch-address-command "nottoomuch-addresses.sh")
>> (notmuch-address-message-insinuate))'
>>
> Ah, I missed notmuch-address-message-insinua
Amadeusz Żołnowski writes:
>> So... based on all the evidence so fare the culprit seems to be that
>> something is moving mail files into your Spam folder on the client.
>> If that rings any bells and solves the problem, great. If not, here
>> is what we need to do to track it down further.
>
>
Just a short note, I have added net-mail/muchsync-2 to Gentoo tree.
Enjoy,
--
Amadeusz Żołnowski
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch
Hi David,
First of all thank you a lot for support. I am Cc'ing ml because the
last paragraph may be useful hint for other users.
David Mazieres writes:
> So to be clear, you are getting tons of lines that start "[SERVER]
> [notmuch]" and contain the string "Ignoring non-mail file"? Is the
> "
Tomi Ollila writes:
>> I can live with the current argument syntax, but since a certain a mount
>> of bikeshedding is expected, here is an alternative suggestion
>>
>> --deduplication={none|mailbox|address}
>
> (is s/deduplicate/deduplication/ intended or accidental change?)
accidental. hmm. wel
On Sun, Aug 30 2015, David Bremner wrote:
> Jani Nikula writes:
>
>> Consider all variants of an email address as one, and print the most
>> common variant.
>
> Other than the quibbles already mentioned, the series looks ok to
> me. For production it should have one or two tests I guess. Oh, and
