Jameson Graef Rollins writes:
> Just a thought: what if messages with a given tag (e.g. "new-thread")
> were always treated as the source of a new thread?
It's a good start. And an approach like that would have the advantage
that one could undo a thread-split by just removing the tag. (That's not
On Wed, Jan 30 2013, David Bremner wrote:
> Let me step back a level and say that special casing git patch series
> strikes me as not yet seeing the problem in enough generality. Others
> might disagree, of course.
I agree with this statement.
So I encounter the thread hijacking problem occasion
>From many replies I understand manual thread-joining and -breaking exists with
>mutt's manual commands and default subject breaking -as Gmail does- would not
>be preferred, while not only version control systems vary subjects within a
>thread, but also discussions with slight off-topic forks an
Michał Nazarewicz
writes:
> I was actually wondering that instead of hard coding the logic into notmuch
> itself, maybe it would be better to provide some sort of "split-thread" and
> "join-threads" which could than be used by separate tagging tool.
Such a customized threading feature would be g
On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 11:39:44AM +0100, Michał Nazarewicz wrote:
> 2 lut 2013 17:21, "Robert Mast" napisał(a):
> > Anyone interested in me patching Notmuch, or shall I keep the changes to
> myself?
>
> I was actually wondering that instead of hard coding the logic into notmuch
> itself, maybe i
2 lut 2013 17:21, "Robert Mast" napisał(a):
> So Gmail-threading is still the best I suppose,
I strongly disagree. Having said that, as long as it's configurable I
obviously won't be blocking your efforts.
> Anyone interested in me patching Notmuch, or shall I keep the changes to
myself?
I was
Robert Mast writes:
> I committed a little patch on a memory-issue I found.
Where did you commit it?
>
> Can someone look whether I used git the right way, or should I study
> git send-email some further?
I guess that's probably the simplest. Otherwise you need to push it to a
publically avail
: notmuch@notmuchmail.org
Onderwerp: [Spam-verdenking][english 100%] RE: Reply all - issue
Robert Mast writes:
>
> Anyone interested in me patching Notmuch, or shall I keep the changes
> to myself?
>
Hi Robert;
If you have patches, and you want feedback on them, then you are of cou
uch at notmuchmail.org
Onderwerp: [Spam-verdenking][english 100%] RE: Reply all - issue
Robert Mast writes:
>
> Anyone interested in me patching Notmuch, or shall I keep the changes
> to myself?
>
Hi Robert;
If you have patches, and you want feedback on them, then you are of course
w
tmuchmail.org
Onderwerp: [Spam-verdenking][english 100%] RE: Reply all - issue
Robert Mast writes:
>
> Anyone interested in me patching Notmuch, or shall I keep the changes
> to myself?
>
Hi Robert;
If you have patches, and you want feedback on them, then you are of course
welcome t
Robert Mast writes:
>
> Anyone interested in me patching Notmuch, or shall I keep the changes
> to myself?
>
Hi Robert;
If you have patches, and you want feedback on them, then you are of
course welcome to send them to the list. Previous experience suggests
us that it is often faster in the lo
Off course I’ll try not to hinder the current notmuch-users. My intent is to
even find some support for it.
As far as I know Gmail was the great example of threading for the
SUP-developers, and SUP lead to Notmuch.
So Gmail-threading is still the best I suppose, except for git
send-email
28 sty 2013 08:37, "Robert Mast" napisał(a):
> I think of a fix that indexes the first dates of (stripped)
subject-changes within threads, and with each first (stripped) subject
change check the body on quotes of previous messages. If there is no quote
to referenced mails then drop the reference a
On Mi, 30 ian 13, 22:39:40, Suvayu Ali wrote:
>
> That said, I think this feature is indeed useful at times but it should
> be implemented in the UI on user command or as a configurable (e.g. mutt
> provides the command), not a default underlying behaviour
> of the backend. If this is pursued, i
David Bremner writes:
>
> Hardcoding particular headers sounds too fragile to me. With that said,
> if you want a corpus of email to investigate, there is e.g.
>
Let me step back a level and say that special casing git patch series
strikes me as not yet seeing the problem in enough generality. O
Robert Mast writes:
> I ran git send-email and became the following line in the mail-header:
>
> "X-Mailer: git-send-email 1.7.9.5"
>
> Can I assume, apart from the version number, that this header-marker applies
> to all git-mail that should not be subject-splitted?
Hardcoding particular header
[mailto:beheer...@tekenbeetziekten.nl]
Verzonden: woensdag 30 januari 2013 21:57
Aan: 'Carl Worth'; 'Jani Nikula'; 'notmuch@notmuchmail.org'
Onderwerp: RE: Reply all - issue
I never used git for mailpatching, so I have no example-mailbox to analyse.
I understand that the subje
Hi,
I am a *very new* notmuch user (notmuch + mutt-kz/Emacs), but I would
like to throw in a few opinions about this topic.
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 06:14:48PM +0100, Robert Mast wrote:
> Thanks for your clear explanation.
>
> The thread-merging and breaking is in the procedure already pointed at
Mast [mailto:beheer...@tekenbeetziekten.nl]
Verzonden: woensdag 30 januari 2013 18:15
Aan: 'Carl Worth'; 'Jani Nikula'; 'notmuch@notmuchmail.org'
Onderwerp: RE: Reply all - issue
Thanks for your clear explanation.
The thread-merging and breaking is in the procedure already p
-breaking?
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: Carl Worth [mailto:cwo...@cworth.org]
Verzonden: dinsdag 29 januari 2013 3:48
Aan: Robert Mast; 'Jani Nikula'; notmuch@notmuchmail.org
Onderwerp: RE: Reply all - issue
Is there any existing thread-breaking? There wasn't the last t
Robert Mast writes:
> Your point on patch-breaking related to gmail and my proposal isn't
> completely clear to me, but I've probably addressed it well with my new
> approach.
The issue here is that many developers tend to develop a patch series
(perhaps with dozens of patches) as a single concep
Thanks for your reply.
I never tried gmail-conversation threading, but from your first reference I
understand it breaks threads on subject unconditionally.
Breaking on subject unconditionally would be even easier to implement, as
comparing the contents of previous messages takes performance and a
On Sun, 27 Jan 2013, Robert Mast wrote:
> Last week I studied many Windows-Mail User Agents with the conversation
> threading feature.
>
> None of them (SUP, mutt-kz(notmuch), Outlook 2010, Thunderbird with
> conversation thread plug in, Postbox, Evolution) could cope with the
> following case:
A
23 matches
Mail list logo
