[PATCH] TODO: date range queries - check

2012-12-10 Thread David Bremner
I'm marking this as moreinfo since the patch as is doesn't seem to satisfy people. Personally I think the key point is that e.g. date:2012-12-10 should do something reasonable (presumably return all messages on that day, pax questions about timezone); whether we need new prefixes I'm less

Re: [PATCH] TODO: date range queries - check

2012-12-10 Thread David Bremner
I'm marking this as moreinfo since the patch as is doesn't seem to satisfy people. Personally I think the key point is that e.g. date:2012-12-10 should do something reasonable (presumably return all messages on that day, pax questions about timezone); whether we need new prefixes I'm less

[PATCH] TODO: date range queries - check

2012-12-09 Thread Tomi Ollila
On Sun, Dec 09 2012, Jani Nikula wrote: > On Sat, 08 Dec 2012, Jameson Graef Rollins > wrote: >> On Sat, Dec 08 2012, David Bremner wrote: >>> Patch? Concrete wording suggestion? >> >> How about: >> >> It would be nice to not require both endpoints to be specified in date >> searches. For

[PATCH] TODO: date range queries - check

2012-12-09 Thread Jani Nikula
On Sat, 08 Dec 2012, Jameson Graef Rollins wrote: > On Sat, Dec 08 2012, David Bremner wrote: >> Patch? Concrete wording suggestion? > > How about: > > It would be nice to not require both endpoints to be specified in date > searches. For example it would be nice to be able to say things like

[PATCH] TODO: date range queries - check

2012-12-08 Thread David Bremner
Jameson Graef Rollins writes: > On Fri, Dec 07 2012, Jani Nikula wrote: >> Fine by me. I was just trying to clean up the file a bit, that's >> all. The only downside I can think of is potential new users stumbling >> on this and thinking we still don't have date queries. *shrug*. > > That's why

Re: [PATCH] TODO: date range queries - check

2012-12-08 Thread David Bremner
Jameson Graef Rollins jroll...@finestructure.net writes: On Fri, Dec 07 2012, Jani Nikula j...@nikula.org wrote: Fine by me. I was just trying to clean up the file a bit, that's all. The only downside I can think of is potential new users stumbling on this and thinking we still don't have

Re: [PATCH] TODO: date range queries - check

2012-12-08 Thread Jameson Graef Rollins
On Sat, Dec 08 2012, David Bremner da...@tethera.net wrote: Patch? Concrete wording suggestion? How about: It would be nice to not require both endpoints to be specified in date searches. For example it would be nice to be able to say things like date:2009-01-1, to specify a search over a

Re: [PATCH] TODO: date range queries - check

2012-12-08 Thread Jani Nikula
On Sat, 08 Dec 2012, Jameson Graef Rollins jroll...@finestructure.net wrote: On Sat, Dec 08 2012, David Bremner da...@tethera.net wrote: Patch? Concrete wording suggestion? How about: It would be nice to not require both endpoints to be specified in date searches. For example it would be

Re: [PATCH] TODO: date range queries - check

2012-12-08 Thread Tomi Ollila
On Sun, Dec 09 2012, Jani Nikula j...@nikula.org wrote: On Sat, 08 Dec 2012, Jameson Graef Rollins jroll...@finestructure.net wrote: On Sat, Dec 08 2012, David Bremner da...@tethera.net wrote: Patch? Concrete wording suggestion? How about: It would be nice to not require both endpoints to

[PATCH] TODO: date range queries - check

2012-12-07 Thread Jani Nikula
On Fri, 07 Dec 2012, Jameson Graef Rollins wrote: > On Fri, Dec 07 2012, David Bremner wrote: >> Jameson Graef Rollins writes: >>> Has this TODO really been resolved? Do searches like "since:2009-01-1" >>> or "until:2009-01-1" really now work? As far as I can tell they don't. >>> Nor are

[PATCH] TODO: date range queries - check

2012-12-07 Thread Jani Nikula
On Fri, 07 Dec 2012, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: > On 12/07/2012 07:19 AM, David Bremner wrote: >> For specifying one-ended ranges, I find the current syntax OK-ish. It >> would be reasonable to formulate a seperate TODO for supporting >> things like date:2012-12-07 > > Out of curiosity, how does

[PATCH] TODO: date range queries - check

2012-12-07 Thread Jameson Graef Rollins
On Fri, Dec 07 2012, Jani Nikula wrote: > Fine by me. I was just trying to clean up the file a bit, that's > all. The only downside I can think of is potential new users stumbling > on this and thinking we still don't have date queries. *shrug*. That's why it should probably just be modified,

[PATCH] TODO: date range queries - check

2012-12-07 Thread Daniel Kahn Gillmor
On 12/07/2012 07:19 AM, David Bremner wrote: > For specifying one-ended ranges, I find the current syntax OK-ish. It > would be reasonable to formulate a seperate TODO for supporting > things like date:2012-12-07 Out of curiosity, how does this syntax interact with timezones? If i send a mail in

[PATCH] TODO: date range queries - check

2012-12-07 Thread Jani Nikula
On Fri, 07 Dec 2012, Jameson Graef Rollins wrote: > On Thu, Dec 06 2012, Jani Nikula wrote: >> --- >> devel/TODO |9 - >> 1 file changed, 9 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/devel/TODO b/devel/TODO >> index eb757af..277a997 100644 >> --- a/devel/TODO >> +++ b/devel/TODO >> @@ -163,15

[PATCH] TODO: date range queries - check

2012-12-07 Thread Jameson Graef Rollins
On Fri, Dec 07 2012, David Bremner wrote: > Jameson Graef Rollins writes: >> Has this TODO really been resolved? Do searches like "since:2009-01-1" >> or "until:2009-01-1" really now work? As far as I can tell they don't. >> Nor are they documented if they do. > > For specifying one-ended

[PATCH] TODO: date range queries - check

2012-12-07 Thread David Bremner
Jameson Graef Rollins writes: > Has this TODO really been resolved? Do searches like "since:2009-01-1" > or "until:2009-01-1" really now work? As far as I can tell they don't. > Nor are they documented if they do. For specifying one-ended ranges, I find the current syntax OK-ish. It would be

[PATCH] TODO: date range queries - check

2012-12-07 Thread Jani Nikula
--- devel/TODO |9 - 1 file changed, 9 deletions(-) diff --git a/devel/TODO b/devel/TODO index eb757af..277a997 100644 --- a/devel/TODO +++ b/devel/TODO @@ -163,15 +163,6 @@ vs. tag-when-all-files-flagged (* above)). Add an interface to accept a "key" and a byte stream, rather than

Re: [PATCH] TODO: date range queries - check

2012-12-07 Thread Jani Nikula
On Fri, 07 Dec 2012, Jameson Graef Rollins jroll...@finestructure.net wrote: On Thu, Dec 06 2012, Jani Nikula j...@nikula.org wrote: --- devel/TODO |9 - 1 file changed, 9 deletions(-) diff --git a/devel/TODO b/devel/TODO index eb757af..277a997 100644 --- a/devel/TODO +++

Re: [PATCH] TODO: date range queries - check

2012-12-07 Thread David Bremner
Jameson Graef Rollins jroll...@finestructure.net writes: Has this TODO really been resolved? Do searches like since:2009-01-1 or until:2009-01-1 really now work? As far as I can tell they don't. Nor are they documented if they do. For specifying one-ended ranges, I find the current syntax

Re: [PATCH] TODO: date range queries - check

2012-12-07 Thread Jameson Graef Rollins
On Fri, Dec 07 2012, David Bremner da...@tethera.net wrote: Jameson Graef Rollins jroll...@finestructure.net writes: Has this TODO really been resolved? Do searches like since:2009-01-1 or until:2009-01-1 really now work? As far as I can tell they don't. Nor are they documented if they do.

Re: [PATCH] TODO: date range queries - check

2012-12-07 Thread Daniel Kahn Gillmor
On 12/07/2012 07:19 AM, David Bremner wrote: For specifying one-ended ranges, I find the current syntax OK-ish. It would be reasonable to formulate a seperate TODO for supporting things like date:2012-12-07 Out of curiosity, how does this syntax interact with timezones? If i send a mail in

Re: [PATCH] TODO: date range queries - check

2012-12-07 Thread Jani Nikula
On Fri, 07 Dec 2012, Daniel Kahn Gillmor d...@fifthhorseman.net wrote: On 12/07/2012 07:19 AM, David Bremner wrote: For specifying one-ended ranges, I find the current syntax OK-ish. It would be reasonable to formulate a seperate TODO for supporting things like date:2012-12-07 Out of

Re: [PATCH] TODO: date range queries - check

2012-12-07 Thread Jani Nikula
On Fri, 07 Dec 2012, Jameson Graef Rollins jroll...@finestructure.net wrote: On Fri, Dec 07 2012, David Bremner da...@tethera.net wrote: Jameson Graef Rollins jroll...@finestructure.net writes: Has this TODO really been resolved? Do searches like since:2009-01-1 or until:2009-01-1 really now

Re: [PATCH] TODO: date range queries - check

2012-12-07 Thread Jameson Graef Rollins
On Fri, Dec 07 2012, Jani Nikula j...@nikula.org wrote: Fine by me. I was just trying to clean up the file a bit, that's all. The only downside I can think of is potential new users stumbling on this and thinking we still don't have date queries. *shrug*. That's why it should probably just be

[PATCH] TODO: date range queries - check

2012-12-06 Thread Jameson Graef Rollins
On Thu, Dec 06 2012, Jani Nikula wrote: > --- > devel/TODO |9 - > 1 file changed, 9 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/devel/TODO b/devel/TODO > index eb757af..277a997 100644 > --- a/devel/TODO > +++ b/devel/TODO > @@ -163,15 +163,6 @@ vs. tag-when-all-files-flagged (* above)). > Add an

[PATCH] TODO: date range queries - check

2012-12-06 Thread Jani Nikula
--- devel/TODO |9 - 1 file changed, 9 deletions(-) diff --git a/devel/TODO b/devel/TODO index eb757af..277a997 100644 --- a/devel/TODO +++ b/devel/TODO @@ -163,15 +163,6 @@ vs. tag-when-all-files-flagged (* above)). Add an interface to accept a key and a byte stream, rather than a

Re: [PATCH] TODO: date range queries - check

2012-12-06 Thread Jameson Graef Rollins
On Thu, Dec 06 2012, Jani Nikula j...@nikula.org wrote: --- devel/TODO |9 - 1 file changed, 9 deletions(-) diff --git a/devel/TODO b/devel/TODO index eb757af..277a997 100644 --- a/devel/TODO +++ b/devel/TODO @@ -163,15 +163,6 @@ vs. tag-when-all-files-flagged (* above)).