On Fri, 16 Dec 2011 09:01:21 -0400, David Bremner da...@tethera.net wrote:
The others are (not too surprisingly) stale and need rebasing. I'm also
not clear on whether we have concensus on whether the patches are
suitable for inclusion, so feedback from others would be welcome
(perhaps before
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 6:07 PM, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 14:44:29 -0700, Jameson Graef Rollins finestructure.net> wrote:
>> In order to push forward with this, though, I think we really need to
>> have a complete unit test for this new functionality. ?We usually like
>> to see
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 6:07 PM, Jani Nikula j...@nikula.org wrote:
On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 14:44:29 -0700, Jameson Graef Rollins
jroll...@finestructure.net wrote:
In order to push forward with this, though, I think we really need to
have a complete unit test for this new functionality. We
On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 09:30:56 -0300, David Bremner wrote:
> Is just because it add a function to the library that you think this
> might be problematic? I don't think we are super-dogmatic about the
> library never growing. When notmuch started, there were no bindings, so
> in retrospect maybe
On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 09:30:56 -0300, David Bremner da...@tethera.net wrote:
Is just because it add a function to the library that you think this
might be problematic? I don't think we are super-dogmatic about the
library never growing. When notmuch started, there were no bindings, so
in
On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 23:18:07 +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
>
> I'm still marking it as RFC. It works for me, but patch 1 might be deemed
> unacceptable.
>
Hi Jani;
Is just because it add a function to the library that you think this
might be problematic? I don't think we are super-dogmatic about
On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 14:44:29 -0700, Jameson Graef Rollins wrote:
> Hi, Jani. Thanks for working on this. This should also be valuable for
> vim users.
Thanks for your interest! :)
> In order to push forward with this, though, I think we really need to
> have a complete unit test for this new
Hi, this is an iteration of id:"cover.1319833617.git.jani at nikula.org"
addressing
comments on the list and IRC. Main changes:
* Results are now limited based on threads (not messages) for thread and summary
output. This is accomplished with a new lib function to count the number of
threads
On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 23:18:07 +0200, Jani Nikula j...@nikula.org wrote:
I'm still marking it as RFC. It works for me, but patch 1 might be deemed
unacceptable.
Hi Jani;
Is just because it add a function to the library that you think this
might be problematic? I don't think we are
On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 00:07:59 +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 14:44:29 -0700, Jameson Graef Rollins finestructure.net> wrote:
> Right. I'd just like to make sure the approach I've taken (particularly
> patch 1 in the set as it touches the lib) is acceptable before spending
> time
On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 23:18:07 +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> Hi, this is an iteration of id:"cover.1319833617.git.jani at nikula.org"
> addressing
> comments on the list and IRC. Main changes:
>
> * Results are now limited based on threads (not messages) for thread and
> summary
> output. This
Hi, this is an iteration of id:cover.1319833617.git.j...@nikula.org addressing
comments on the list and IRC. Main changes:
* Results are now limited based on threads (not messages) for thread and summary
output. This is accomplished with a new lib function to count the number of
threads in
On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 00:07:59 +0200, Jani Nikula j...@nikula.org wrote:
On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 14:44:29 -0700, Jameson Graef Rollins
jroll...@finestructure.net wrote:
Right. I'd just like to make sure the approach I've taken (particularly
patch 1 in the set as it touches the lib) is acceptable
On Mon, 4 Jul 2011 08:07:18 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin wrote:
> This version implements suggestions by Austin.
>
> Regards,
> Dmitry
I have pushed this series.
On Mon, 4 Jul 2011 08:07:18 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin
dmitry.kuroch...@gmail.com wrote:
This version implements suggestions by Austin.
Regards,
Dmitry
I have pushed this series.
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
This version fixes the issues mentioned by Austin and highlights the currently
displayed message in the outline buffer. My previous issues with 'point-entered
and 'point-left were caused by linum-mode, so don't enable it for notmuch-show
buffers.
I haven't had time yet to implement a more
This version fixes the issues mentioned by Austin and highlights the currently
displayed message in the outline buffer. My previous issues with 'point-entered
and 'point-left were caused by linum-mode, so don't enable it for notmuch-show
buffers.
I haven't had time yet to implement a more
This version implements suggestions by Austin.
Regards,
Dmitry
This version implements suggestions by Austin.
Regards,
Dmitry
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch
Many thanks for the rapid response: I have modified the
patches as suggested and this version includes the
necessary documentation changes. I have also modified the
emacs portion to apply to current master.
Best wishes
Mark
These patches implement a reply to sender function.
On the command
Many thanks for the rapid response: I have modified the
patches as suggested and this version includes the
necessary documentation changes. I have also modified the
emacs portion to apply to current master.
Best wishes
Mark
These patches implement a reply to sender function.
On the command
101 - 121 of 121 matches
Mail list logo
