Jameson Graef Rollins [2020-01-14T11:55:36-08] wrote:
> Honestly I don't see the point of any user configuration here. Seems
> likely to only add confusion and possibly improperly deleted messages,
> which would be very bad.
>
> Just use the "deleted" tag only. It's already being used in multipl
On 2020-01-14 17:48:34, Ryan Tate wrote:
> Daniel Kahn Gillmor writes:
>> So i'm proposing "notmuch purge", which could be something as simple as
>> the equivalent of:
>>
>>notmuch search --output=files --format=text0 tag:deleted | \
>> xargs --null --no-run-if-empty rm && \
>>
On Tue 2020-01-14 15:03:29 -0500, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
> Agreed. If you want to delete messages matching an another tag, you just
> run:
>
> notmuch tag +deleted tag:another
> notmuch purge
>
> Composability wins over configurability in this case. :)
I like this outcome, though i'm not s
On Wed 2020-01-15 09:59:14 +1100, Brian May wrote:
> Daniel Kahn Gillmor writes:
>
>> So i'm proposing "notmuch purge", which could be something as simple as
>> the equivalent of:
>
> I can't help think it will only be a matter of time before somebody
> mistypes the search spec and accidentally de
On Tue, Jan 14 2020, Ryan Tate wrote:
> Is there any other notmuch command that results in a change to the state
> of actual mail files, as opposed to the database?
If maildir.synchronize_flags is set true then maildir flags in message
file names will be synchronized with tags (see notmuch-config
Daniel Kahn Gillmor writes:
> So i'm proposing "notmuch purge", which could be something as simple as
> the equivalent of:
I can't help think it will only be a matter of time before somebody
mistypes the search spec and accidentally deletes all their mail...
Of course, this won't be a drama, be
Daniel Kahn Gillmor writes:
> So i'm proposing "notmuch purge", which could be something as simple as
> the equivalent of:
>
>notmuch search --output=files --format=text0 tag:deleted | \
> xargs --null --no-run-if-empty rm && \
> notmuch new --no-hooks
>
> (credit for the pipeli
On 2020-01-14 11:55:36, Jameson Graef Rollins wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 14 2020, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
>>> I think that the "SEARCH-TERMS" part should be configurable, not
>>> hard-coded. A user could have setting like
>>> "search.purge_tags=deleted;spam" and that would lead to search terms
>>> "t
On Tue, Jan 14 2020, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
>> I think that the "SEARCH-TERMS" part should be configurable, not
>> hard-coded. A user could have setting like
>> "search.purge_tags=deleted;spam" and that would lead to search terms
>> "tag:deleted OR tag:spam" in the purge operation.
>
> I want
On Tue 2020-01-14 07:01:08 +0200, Teemu Likonen wrote:
> We would need "notmuch search --exclude=false tag:deleted" to really
> find all messages with tag:deleted.
I agree that we ought to deliberately avoid the exclude_tags when
purging.
> I think that the "SEARCH-TERMS" part should be configura
10 matches
Mail list logo
