[notmuch] loss of duplicate messages

2010-11-11 Thread Carl Worth
On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 19:53:41 -0500, Rob Browning wrote: > I'm not sure what the current plan is, but please consider this a > belated agreement. It doesn't necessarily need to be the default (and > perhaps shouldn't be), but I'd like to have some way to ask notmuch for > *all* matching messages

[notmuch] loss of duplicate messages

2010-09-15 Thread Rob Browning
jrollins at finestructure.net (Jameson Rollins) writes: > I'm not exactly sure what the correct behavior is here, but I would > actually like to see my messages sent to the list returned to me. > It's a way of verifying that they did go to the list, as well as > getting a feeling for the round

Re: [notmuch] loss of duplicate messages

2010-09-15 Thread Rob Browning
jrollins at finestructure.net (Jameson Rollins) writes: I'm not exactly sure what the correct behavior is here, but I would actually like to see my messages sent to the list returned to me. It's a way of verifying that they did go to the list, as well as getting a feeling for the round trip

[notmuch] loss of duplicate messages

2010-02-24 Thread Jameson Rollins
Hi, folks. I'm continuing to find it problematic that duplicate messages are only appearing to be indexed once. I'm wondering what are the possbile solutions to this issue, if any. For instance, I sent a message that was bcc'd to a long list of people, including myself. All of my sent mail is

[notmuch] loss of duplicate messages

2010-02-05 Thread Marten Veldthuis
On Fri, 05 Feb 2010 11:31:34 -0500, Jameson Rollins wrote: > I'm noticing that notmuch is either not syncing, or not returning in > searches, duplicate messages that have identical bodies but different > headers. This is indeed the correct behaviour of notmuch. There has been some discussion on

[notmuch] loss of duplicate messages

2010-02-05 Thread micah anderson
On Fri, 05 Feb 2010 14:47:03 -0500, Jameson Rollins wrote: > On Fri, 05 Feb 2010 14:39:22 -0500, micah anderson > wrote: > > Welcome to how gmail does it. > > Why welcome me to "how gmail does it"?! I never wanted to go there! Because the perception of the internet by the third larges mail

[notmuch] loss of duplicate messages

2010-02-05 Thread Jameson Rollins
On Fri, 05 Feb 2010 14:39:22 -0500, micah anderson wrote: > Welcome to how gmail does it. Why welcome me to "how gmail does it"?! I never wanted to go there! -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size:

[notmuch] loss of duplicate messages

2010-02-05 Thread micah anderson
On Fri, 05 Feb 2010 12:49:21 -0500, Jameson Graef Rollins wrote: > A policy of only returning one is going to be problematic for folks who > want or expect to see the other. And in fact think I want to see both. > I have both, and I've asked notmuch to index both, so why shouldn't it > return

[notmuch] loss of duplicate messages

2010-02-05 Thread Jameson Graef Rollins
On Fri, 05 Feb 2010 18:25:59 +0100, Marten Veldthuis wrote: > This is indeed the correct behaviour of notmuch. There has been some > discussion on it in the past, I believe with proposals to track both > messages and show only one; but I don't think I've seen proponents of > showing both

[notmuch] loss of duplicate messages

2010-02-05 Thread Jameson Rollins
Hey, folks. I'm noticing a somewhat problematic behavior of notmuch that I was wondering if anyone could comment on. I'm noticing that notmuch is either not syncing, or not returning in searches, duplicate messages that have identical bodies but different headers. This comes up when I send