Emacs: Crypto: How to get automatic encryption?

On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 20:05:14 +0100, Gregor Zattler wrote: > 2) encrypt if suitable public keys for all recipients are in >GnuPGs key ring. [...] > But I have no clue about how to do this with notmuch/Emacs. Isn't that what David provides an elisp-snippet for in id:"cunk4576ezs.fsf at

Re: Emacs: Crypto: How to get automatic encryption?

On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 20:05:14 +0100, Gregor Zattler telegr...@gmx.net wrote: 2) encrypt if suitable public keys for all recipients are in GnuPGs key ring. [...] But I have no clue about how to do this with notmuch/Emacs. Isn't that what David provides an elisp-snippet for in

Regarding notmuch and Fedora 16

On Tue, 03 Jan 2012 17:09:39 -0500, Peter Portante wrote: > I am interested in using notmuch from within emacs, but have not been > able to get the latest version of notmuch (0.10.2) to compile under > Fedora 16. Looks like we have a growing Fedora community, yay! :-) And it's nothing you're

[ANNOUNCE] mutt with notmuch support

On Tue, 03 Jan 2012 13:17:04 -0800, Jameson Graef Rollins wrote: > On Tue, 3 Jan 2012 20:59:51 +0100, Karel Zak wrote: > > Unfortunately, the latest package for Fedora is notmuch-0.5-4.fc15 ;-( > > Yikes that's old (0.11 is being released eminently). There have been > quite a few important

[ANNOUNCE] mutt with notmuch support

On Tue, 3 Jan 2012 20:59:51 +0100, Karel Zak wrote: > Unfortunately, the latest package for Fedora is notmuch-0.5-4.fc15 ;-( Take a look at id:"8762i8hrb9.fsf at bookbinder.fernseed.info". There is a gmime patch which still applies cleanly to everything up to the current git head and which will

[ANNOUNCE] mutt with notmuch support

On Tue, Jan 03, 2012 at 01:39:38PM +0100, Karel Zak wrote: > This is not another curses front-end for notmuch, this is mutt :-) Outstanding! Assuming this mail makes it to the list, I can confirm that it works well for me! Although I will have to find and dust off an old .muttrc... I had to

Re: [ANNOUNCE] mutt with notmuch support

On Tue, 3 Jan 2012 20:59:51 +0100, Karel Zak k...@redhat.com wrote: Unfortunately, the latest package for Fedora is notmuch-0.5-4.fc15 ;-( Take a look at id:8762i8hrb9@bookbinder.fernseed.info. There is a gmime patch which still applies cleanly to everything up to the current git head and

Re: [ANNOUNCE] mutt with notmuch support

On Tue, 03 Jan 2012 13:17:04 -0800, Jameson Graef Rollins jroll...@finestructure.net wrote: On Tue, 3 Jan 2012 20:59:51 +0100, Karel Zak k...@redhat.com wrote: Unfortunately, the latest package for Fedora is notmuch-0.5-4.fc15 ;-( Yikes that's old (0.11 is being released eminently). There

Re: Regarding notmuch and Fedora 16

On Tue, 03 Jan 2012 17:09:39 -0500, Peter Portante peter.a.porta...@gmail.com wrote: I am interested in using notmuch from within emacs, but have not been able to get the latest version of notmuch (0.10.2) to compile under Fedora 16. Looks like we have a growing Fedora community, yay! :-)

S/MIME support in notmuch

On Wed, 07 Dec 2011 21:58:03 -0500, Dan Bryant wrote: > I'd like to report some success on getting S/MIME signature > verification working using notmuch and the recently-released GMime > 2.6. I specifically tested with notmuch-0.10.2 and gmime-2.6.1. [...] > I don't have submittable patches for

Re: S/MIME support in notmuch

On Wed, 07 Dec 2011 21:58:03 -0500, Dan Bryant dan.bry...@jhuapl.edu wrote: I'd like to report some success on getting S/MIME signature verification working using notmuch and the recently-released GMime 2.6. I specifically tested with notmuch-0.10.2 and gmime-2.6.1. [...] I don't have

compile error of current git on F15

On Fri, 25 Nov 2011 13:43:35 -0500, David Bremner wrote: > Just confirm, all the crypto tests pass with this patch? In that case, > can we have the patch (preferably as generated by git-send-email)? Or > did I miss it somewhere in this thread? I don't believe the patch ever made it to the list,

compile error of current git on F15

On Wed, 01 Jun 2011 09:55:16 -0700, Jameson Graef Rollins wrote: > On Wed, 01 Jun 2011 05:35:29 -0700, Dirk Hohndel > wrote: > > This used to work and used to be supported and was broken in a > > recent notmuch patch. > > If you don't have access to gmime 2.4, then maybe you could look into >

Re: compile error of current git on F15

On Wed, 01 Jun 2011 09:55:16 -0700, Jameson Graef Rollins jroll...@finestructure.net wrote: On Wed, 01 Jun 2011 05:35:29 -0700, Dirk Hohndel hohn...@infradead.org wrote: This used to work and used to be supported and was broken in a recent notmuch patch. If you don't have access to gmime

release-candidate/0.6

On Fri, 06 May 2011 12:46:34 -0700, Jameson Graef Rollins wrote: > However, the current version of libgmime-2.4 in testing and unstable > (2.4.23-1) unfortunately breaks signature verification, which means > that many of the crypto tests will fail. The issue has been fixed > upstream, and we've

Re: release-candidate/0.6

On Fri, 06 May 2011 12:46:34 -0700, Jameson Graef Rollins jroll...@finestructure.net wrote: However, the current version of libgmime-2.4 in testing and unstable (2.4.23-1) unfortunately breaks signature verification, which means that many of the crypto tests will fail. The issue has been

[Review] Re: new "crypto" branch providing full PGP/MIME support

On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 20:45:15 -0400, David Bremner wrote: > Further to our discussion on IRC the other day about providing > feedback on patches, I have run these patches pretty much all of > February with no glitches. I am running them on 3 different machines, > although they are all Debian

Org-mode support

On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 08:40:06 +0100, Albin Stjerna wrote: > Here I'd like to call your attention to notmorg, [...] it generates > an agenda file containing all mails tagged ?todo?, with optionally > generated scheduled/deadline tags. Of course, it could be updated to > use your interaction code

Re: Org-mode support

On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 08:40:06 +0100, Albin Stjerna al...@eval.nu wrote: Here I'd like to call your attention to notmorg, [...] it generates an agenda file containing all mails tagged »todo«, with optionally generated scheduled/deadline tags. Of course, it could be updated to use your

Org-mode support

On Mon, 07 Feb 2011 22:22:17 +0100, Matthieu Lemerre wrote: > I have written the org-mode support for notmuch a while ago. It allows > to open links to notmuch from org-mode and create org-mode link from > notmuch buffers. Excellent, thanks for this, I'll check it out - how does this compare to

new "crypto" branch providing full PGP/MIME support

On Fri, 04 Feb 2011 09:32:23 -0800, Jameson Rollins wrote: > Yeah, I've found some emails that are doing this as well. I'm looking > in to what we can do to mitigate the problem, which I think is > ultimately a problem in GMime. The json output should not be > breaking, though, so that I will

Re: new crypto branch providing full PGP/MIME support

On Fri, 04 Feb 2011 09:32:23 -0800, Jameson Rollins jroll...@finestructure.net wrote: Yeah, I've found some emails that are doing this as well. I'm looking in to what we can do to mitigate the problem, which I think is ultimately a problem in GMime. The json output should not be breaking,

new "crypto" branch providing full PGP/MIME support

On Thu, 03 Feb 2011 13:02:41 -0800, Jameson Rollins wrote: > > Can we pass the decrypted text to message mode on a reply? > Yeah, some folks pointed this out on #notmuch this morning. The > decryption is only happening in notmuch-show, but we need to do it in > notmuch-reply as well for the

new "crypto" branch providing full PGP/MIME support

On Wed, 02 Feb 2011 17:18:45 -0800, Jameson Rollins wrote: > Please test and provide feedback. I would really like to see this > series merged into the mainline for the next release, if at all > possible. Fan. Tastic. Thanks so much for this, incredible work! Grabbed and testing now, the

Re: new crypto branch providing full PGP/MIME support

On Wed, 02 Feb 2011 17:18:45 -0800, Jameson Rollins jroll...@finestructure.net wrote: Please test and provide feedback. I would really like to see this series merged into the mainline for the next release, if at all possible. Fan. Tastic. Thanks so much for this, incredible work! Grabbed

Bug in emacs showing long threads

On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 22:27:05 -0500, Scott Henson wrote: > I've been having problems with really long threads for a while when > using notmuch. When I click on them in emacs to display the content, > I get "Lisp nesting exceeds `max-lisp-eval-depth'" Hi Scott, have you tried just bumping up the

Re: Bug in emacs showing long threads

On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 22:27:05 -0500, Scott Henson sc...@foolishpride.org wrote: I've been having problems with really long threads for a while when using notmuch. When I click on them in emacs to display the content, I get Lisp nesting exceeds `max-lisp-eval-depth' Hi Scott, have you tried

[PATCH] How to improve the mail handling workflow?

On Sat, 13 Nov 2010 07:05:58 +0100, Michal Sojka wrote: > I agree with you in that in many cases tags can be replaced by saved > searches. Last time I did it, i.e. used saved searches to distinguish > messages from different mailing lists, the result was that it took > very long time (something

[PATCH] How to improve the mail handling workflow?

On Fri, 12 Nov 2010 17:35:22 +0100, Matthieu Lemerre wrote: > I prefer to add tags, for the following reasons: It sounds like we do much the same things with our mail except that your approach is quite disciplined and mine quite lazy :-) > - If I want to search through a mailing list, I don't

[PATCH] How to improve the mail handling workflow?

On Fri, 12 Nov 2010 16:23:58 +0100, Matthieu Lemerre wrote: > Here is first a patch that copes with this last point. Whenever you > want to archive a thread, it finds whether you forgot to add a custom > "user" tag to a message, and if so asks you for a tag to add before > archiving. That way, I

Re: [PATCH] How to improve the mail handling workflow?

On Fri, 12 Nov 2010 16:23:58 +0100, Matthieu Lemerre ra...@free.fr wrote: Here is first a patch that copes with this last point. Whenever you want to archive a thread, it finds whether you forgot to add a custom user tag to a message, and if so asks you for a tag to add before archiving. That

Re: [PATCH] How to improve the mail handling workflow?

On Fri, 12 Nov 2010 17:35:22 +0100, Matthieu Lemerre ra...@free.fr wrote: I prefer to add tags, for the following reasons: It sounds like we do much the same things with our mail except that your approach is quite disciplined and mine quite lazy :-) - If I want to search through a mailing

notmuch for documents

On Sat, 06 Nov 2010 23:28:21 +, Darren McGuicken wrote: > I've now had a chance to play with this a little and while indexing, > tagging and searching all seem to work as expected, I am getting the > error 'Stack overflow in regexp matcher' when I try to view any of the > ebooks

notmuch for documents

On Sat, 06 Nov 2010 16:12:17 -0400, Jameson Rollins wrote: > But that's it! Everything else works as a perfect ebook indexer. I > can of course even add tags to my books. Beautiful. It's really > quite incredible how well it works for this out of the box. The only > other issue is that my

notmuch for documents

On Sat, 06 Nov 2010 16:59:17 -0400, Jameson Rollins wrote: > Hey, Darren. Total side note, but you might be interested in the recent > message from Kristoffer about his nice rss2message utility, "sluk", that > works great for translating rss feeds into notmuch-indexable messages: Thanks for the

notmuch for documents

On Sat, 06 Nov 2010 16:12:17 -0400, Jameson Rollins wrote: > Notmuch is the best damn mail system there ever was and we wouldn't > want to mess with that. Does abstracting everything in notmuch from > "messages" -> "documents" hurt it as a mail system? What if just the > back-end were

Re: notmuch for documents

On Sat, 06 Nov 2010 16:12:17 -0400, Jameson Rollins jroll...@finestructure.net wrote: But that's it! Everything else works as a perfect ebook indexer. I can of course even add tags to my books. Beautiful. It's really quite incredible how well it works for this out of the box. The only

Re: notmuch for documents

On Sat, 06 Nov 2010 23:28:21 +, Darren McGuicken mailing-notm...@fernseed.info wrote: I've now had a chance to play with this a little and while indexing, tagging and searching all seem to work as expected, I am getting the error 'Stack overflow in regexp matcher' when I try to view any

bug report: notmuch-hello 'All tags' view

On Tue, 02 Nov 2010 17:33:08 -0400, Jameson Rollins wrote: > On Tue, 02 Nov 2010 21:03:55 +0000, Darren McGuicken fernseed.info> wrote: > > A call to 'notmuch search-tags' from the command line does indeed > > return an empty string as the first entry for me[1]. > > fwiw

Re: bug report: notmuch-hello 'All tags' view

On Tue, 02 Nov 2010 17:33:08 -0400, Jameson Rollins jroll...@finestructure.net wrote: On Tue, 02 Nov 2010 21:03:55 +, Darren McGuicken mailing-notm...@fernseed.info wrote: A call to 'notmuch search-tags' from the command line does indeed return an empty string as the first entry for me

bug report: notmuch-hello 'All tags' view

On Tue, 02 Nov 2010 20:17:56 +, Darren McGuicken wrote: > I've noticed since rebasing to 0.4 that I'm seeing an empty entry in the > 'All tags' view of notmuch-hello which appears to represent a search > against 'tag:'. Continuing what's turning into an epic one-man list-noise g

bug report: notmuch-hello 'All tags' view

Wow, that was probably the most secure bug report in history - this time in plain for those of you who don't have access to Carl's private key! I've noticed since rebasing to 0.4 that I'm seeing an empty entry in the 'All tags' view of notmuch-hello which appears to represent a search against

***UNCHECKED*** bug report: notmuch-hello 'All tags' view

A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-encrypted Size: 11 bytes Desc: not available URL: -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed...

Re: bug report: notmuch-hello 'All tags' view

Wow, that was probably the most secure bug report in history - this time in plain for those of you who don't have access to Carl's private key! I've noticed since rebasing to 0.4 that I'm seeing an empty entry in the 'All tags' view of notmuch-hello which appears to represent a search against

Re: bug report: notmuch-hello 'All tags' view

On Tue, 02 Nov 2010 20:17:56 +, Darren McGuicken mailing-notm...@fernseed.info wrote: I've noticed since rebasing to 0.4 that I'm seeing an empty entry in the 'All tags' view of notmuch-hello which appears to represent a search against 'tag:'. Continuing what's turning into an epic one

Kudos! Also: +1 PGP!

On Mon, 26 Apr 2010 07:16:16 -0400, Jameson Rollins wrote: > > In the meantime, I find myself using the snippet from Tassilo in: > > id:87zl6cl595.fsf at thinkpad.tsdh.de > > I'm interested in using this as a stop-gap, but unfortunately I'm not > finding this message in my local store. Can

Re: Kudos! Also: +1 PGP!

On Mon, 26 Apr 2010 07:16:16 -0400, Jameson Rollins jroll...@finestructure.net wrote: In the meantime, I find myself using the snippet from Tassilo in: id:87zl6cl595@thinkpad.tsdh.de I'm interested in using this as a stop-gap, but unfortunately I'm not finding this message in my

Kudos! Also: +1 PGP!

I just wanted to drop a quick mail to the list to give you all my huge thanks for this already astonishingly useful tool! Like a few others, it seems, I arrived here after reading a not-very-grumpy review in the Grumpy Editor series[1]. Everything-is-a-search combined with CLI access?! Sold!

Kudos! Also: +1 PGP!

I just wanted to drop a quick mail to the list to give you all my huge thanks for this already astonishingly useful tool! Like a few others, it seems, I arrived here after reading a not-very-grumpy review in the Grumpy Editor series[1]. Everything-is-a-search combined with CLI access?! Sold!