On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 6:00 PM, Mark Walters wrote:
>
> Just a quick question: does this update the database with
> maildir://files URIs instead of just filenames? In other words is it
> safe to try out on actual mailstores?
>
It doesn't change any of the existing filenames or do anything like a
Hi
Just a quick question: does this update the database with
maildir://files URIs instead of just filenames? In other words is it
safe to try out on actual mailstores?
(I used it on a trial system but when I reverted to master some things
seemed to stop working)
Best wishes
Mark
On Mon, 25 Ju
On Mon, 25 Jun 2012, Ethan Glasser-Camp wrote:
> This is just a quick hack to get started on adding an mbox backend.
>
> The fact that the default maildir is scanned "automagically" is a
> little weird, but it doesn't do any harm unless you decide to put mail
> there that you really don't want ind
On Mon, 25 Jun 2012, Ethan Glasser-Camp wrote:
> This commit introduces the mailstore module which provides two
> functions, notmuch_mailstore_open and notmuch_mailstore_close. These
> functions are currently just stub calls to fopen and fclose, but later
> can be made more complex in order to su
On Thu, 28 Jun 2012, Ethan wrote:
> I sent this at first as a reply-only-to-sender. Oops! Sorry Mark for the
> double send.
>
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 5:17 AM, Mark Walters gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> > Personally, this isn't my favorite approach, for the following reasons:
>> >
>> > 1. Notmuch, at so
otfiles/blob/master/emacs/init-50-mail.el#L111-114
Regards,
--
Thomas/Schnouki
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 489 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/attachments/20120628/9adcbcfd/attachment.pgp>
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/attachments/20120628/af6b2439/attachment.pgp>
David Bremner writes:
> Ethan writes:
>>
>> Yeah, I don't even know how an mbox message gets flagged read and I don't
>> know how I would support it.
>>
>
> I think read only access to mboxes is fine. Yes, somebody will be
> unhappy, but the only convincing argument I have heard for mboxes or
>
Hi
Just a quick question: does this update the database with
maildir://files URIs instead of just filenames? In other words is it
safe to try out on actual mailstores?
(I used it on a trial system but when I reverted to master some things
seemed to stop working)
Best wishes
Mark
On Mon, 25 Ju
...
URL:
<http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/attachments/20120628/83505008/attachment.html>
On Mon, 25 Jun 2012, Ethan Glasser-Camp wrote:
> This is just a quick hack to get started on adding an mbox backend.
>
> The fact that the default maildir is scanned "automagically" is a
> little weird, but it doesn't do any harm unless you decide to put mail
> there that you really don't want ind
On Mon, 25 Jun 2012, Ethan Glasser-Camp wrote:
> This commit introduces the mailstore module which provides two
> functions, notmuch_mailstore_open and notmuch_mailstore_close. These
> functions are currently just stub calls to fopen and fclose, but later
> can be made more complex in order to su
On Thu, 28 Jun 2012, Ethan wrote:
> I sent this at first as a reply-only-to-sender. Oops! Sorry Mark for the
> double send.
>
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 5:17 AM, Mark Walters
> wrote:
>
>> > Personally, this isn't my favorite approach, for the following reasons:
>> >
>> > 1. Notmuch, at some point
David Bremner writes:
> Ethan writes:
>>
>> Yeah, I don't even know how an mbox message gets flagged read and I don't
>> know how I would support it.
>>
>
> I think read only access to mboxes is fine. Yes, somebody will be
> unhappy, but the only convincing argument I have heard for mboxes or
>
Ethan writes:
>
> Yeah, I don't even know how an mbox message gets flagged read and I don't
> know how I would support it.
>
I think read only access to mboxes is fine. Yes, somebody will be
unhappy, but the only convincing argument I have heard for mboxes or
similar formats is archival use.
d
It is pretty big and there are a couple places where the series could be
simplified, the first patch in particular. I will break it out and resubmit
piecewise but I'd like to know how to address these particular issues:
1. Are URIs the way to specify individual messages, despite bremner's
concerns
live with that.
Me too.
BR,
Jani.
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/attachments/20120628/23e75a85/attachment.html>
On Wed, 27 Jun 2012, David Bremner wrote:
> My bias is probably apparent in that I pushed the original patch...
And mine in that the first thing I did in my .emacs, back in 2009 or so,
was write a reply-to-sender function, and reverse the behavior. In fact,
I just got around to using the built-in
at I'm using now:
(define-key notmuch-show-mode-map "r" 'notmuch-show-reply)
(define-key notmuch-show-mode-map "R" 'notmuch-show-reply-sender)
(define-key notmuch-search-mode-map "r" 'notmuch-search-reply-to-thread)
(define-key notmuch-search-mode-map "R" 'notmuch-search-reply-to-thread-sender)
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/attachments/20120628/e2c844fc/attachment.pgp>
Philip Hands writes:
> I find the change to the new (only reply to sender) behaviour serously
> irritating, because it seems I cannot train myself to hit R all the time
> (which is pretty much what I always want).
I'm in a similar camp. I tried (and failed) to adopt to the current
mode, (once I r
hmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/attachments/20120628/029cfadd/attachment.pgp>
Hi, Ethan. I haven't really looked at this patch set at all yet, but I
did notice that it's huge, and includes multiple big changes. Is there
any way you can break these up into separate smaller and more digestable
series? It would certainly help relieve the review burden.
jamie.
pgpKm0xwdRAj
en.
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/20120628/36b4fe12/attachment-0001.pgp>
Le 28 juin 2012 à 18:21 CEST, Jameson Graef Rollins a écrit :
> On Thu, Jun 28 2012, Philip Hands wrote:
>> Actually, instead of either of these options, how about some way of
>> letting r do the single reply, and then once inside the reply, having
>> some key binding to add the rest of the recipi
Daniel Schoepe wrote:
> This introduces a variable to control after how many characters a line
> is wrapped by notmuch-wash-wrap-long-lines (still wrapping at the
> window width if it is lower).
Hi!
Did this patch make it into mainline notmuch? Because I can't find the variable
notmuch-wash-wra
On Thu, Jun 28 2012, Philip Hands wrote:
> Actually, instead of either of these options, how about some way of
> letting r do the single reply, and then once inside the reply, having
> some key binding to add the rest of the recipients in the group, or flip
> between the two options so one can cha
d.
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/20120628/0013a5d6/attachment.pgp>
On Thu, Jun 28 2012, Mark Walters wrote:
> Of course, it is not my project so I am happy to go along with whatever
> choice is made.
I think everyone who has put in time and effort to make the project
great can claim a little bit of ownership. And that certainly includes
you, Mark.
jamie.
pgp
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/20120628/ae92e6de/attachment.pgp>
Jesse Rosenthal writes:
...
> If it's not obvious, I'm pretty strongly against Carl's roll-back. I
> could, of course, just uncomment my old correction in my .emacs, but I
> think it's a change that could hurt users. Those who are more likely to
> prefer the reply-all behavior are more likely to
On Wed, 27 Jun 2012, David Bremner wrote:
> My bias is probably apparent in that I pushed the original patch...
And mine in that the first thing I did in my .emacs, back in 2009 or so,
was write a reply-to-sender function, and reverse the behavior. In fact,
I just got around to using the built-in
Ethan writes:
>
> Yeah, I don't even know how an mbox message gets flagged read and I don't
> know how I would support it.
>
I think read only access to mboxes is fine. Yes, somebody will be
unhappy, but the only convincing argument I have heard for mboxes or
similar formats is archival use.
d
_
On Thu, 28 Jun 2012, David Bremner wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jun 2012 10:55:53 -0700, Jameson Graef Rollins finestructure.net> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 27 2012, Carl Worth wrote:
>> > Since the beginning of time, the emacs interface provided a keybinding
>> > of 'r' to reply to a message, (and originally
I sent this at first as a reply-only-to-sender. Oops! Sorry Mark for the
double send.
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 5:17 AM, Mark Walters wrote:
> > Personally, this isn't my favorite approach, for the following reasons:
> >
> > 1. Notmuch, at some point in its history, chose to store file paths
> > re
amongst other things). It might be worth saying that this
> initial implementation only works for unchanging mboxs (rather than the
> append only condition that you currently say). But I have not got as far
> as applying/testing the series yet.
>
Yeah, I don't even know how an mbox message gets flagged read and I don't
know how I would support it.
Ethan
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/attachments/20120628/cc9e8ea6/attachment-0001.html>
On Thu, 28.06.2012 09:41, Albin Stjerna wrote:
> If it didn't make it: what is now the preferred method of wrapping
> long lines when reading emails using notmuch/Emacs?
As far as I can tell, it didn't make it into mainline (yet?). However, it
changes a file that is rarely modified by other patche
On Jun 28, 2012 3:06 AM, "David Bremner" wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 27 2012, Carl Worth wrote:
> > > This restores the original keybinding and uses the new keybinding for
> > > the new feature.
>
> My bias is probably apparent in that I pushed the original patch...
And mine in that I sent the origin
Daniel Schoepe wrote:
> This introduces a variable to control after how many characters a line
> is wrapped by notmuch-wash-wrap-long-lines (still wrapping at the
> window width if it is lower).
Hi!
Did this patch make it into mainline notmuch? Because I can't find the variable
notmuch-wash-wra
On Thu, 28 Jun 2012, David Bremner wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jun 2012 10:55:53 -0700, Jameson Graef Rollins
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 27 2012, Carl Worth wrote:
>> > Since the beginning of time, the emacs interface provided a keybinding
>> > of 'r' to reply to a message, (and originally, all recipients
39 matches
Mail list logo
