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
On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 21:16:13 -0600, Rob Browning wrote:
> Are persistent tags required here? The original question at least,
> seemed to just be asking for a visual indicator that a message has
> encrypted or signed bits. So I wondered if that might be accomplished
> without actual tags.
Hey, R
me to be the 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>
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
On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 15:08:39 -0500, Daniel Kahn Gillmor
wrote:
> The outstanding question in my mind is whether those tags could be
> mistaken by a naïve user for meaning one of the other concepts. Is
> there a way to name the tags to minimize that kind of confusion?
I think that would be diffi
t straightforward 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>
ere a way to name 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 cod
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/attachments/20110228/44071b68/attachment.pgp>
but maybe it could be
assigned after 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 02/28/2011 02:56 PM, Jameson Rollins wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 13:59:54 -0500, Daniel Kahn Gillmor
> 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
On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 13:59:54 -0500, Daniel Kahn Gillmor
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 lines of just tagging
ication/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/attachments/20110228/6a2c2577/attachment.pgp>
On 02/28/2011 01:25 PM, Jameson Rollins wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 08:52:45 -0500, Ross Glover
> wrote:
>> 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 e
On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 08:52:45 -0500, Ross Glover wrote:
> 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 achi
t available
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 fu
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 fu
On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 10:41:48 +, Darren McGuicken
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 id:"87sjw2h6xy@bookbinder.fernseed.info"
> for expired ke
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 co
20 matches
Mail list logo
