From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27DA56DE1385 for ; Mon, 10 Oct 2016 17:40:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at cworth.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.82 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.82 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Received: from arlo.cworth.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (arlo.cworth.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6GW9_E_wuUer for ; Mon, 10 Oct 2016 17:40:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pa0-f52.google.com (mail-pa0-f52.google.com [209.85.220.52]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 31EFD6DE1381 for ; Mon, 10 Oct 2016 17:40:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pa0-f52.google.com with SMTP id rz1so4217026pab.1 for ; Mon, 10 Oct 2016 17:40:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=nFA1keNAHOoDNdSd4r20+4ywZQfyl3qO/2ZO39XYMhg=; b=J8CoaxWD8T6XMakIURWuKnLwr+brSGRm+Sce9/vARi7GPcmnpDmTIV9/SMEka37o3C cg4aqYtIJsP5phwtAw3iTl9Yd5LF5juVCkA2daPVvTeWYp4gHIMt3OzFyk+3GfRDql+R JYSK9xxWLrBONLQu5QV46WUB4KWTyFsPUkjr9zW420K4MZvPFCcnFUlum0UqORJb/N9O iHF3tLb3JU/Cdmzv2VJ7HjqQcdMcIU64O7tUn+Yh+qNdWRH3lvvVtQn2ue4uQhRwC7kS 6MnOoPMGmB4b1d66siyqQA1UkJAKsRYtunew327PWQeAZbpz8TgiLgezUuE2YsWGT43F 8MJQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to :references:subject:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=nFA1keNAHOoDNdSd4r20+4ywZQfyl3qO/2ZO39XYMhg=; b=ChSsROMlip7nVXlsgjwzIYRsUf6MQLJipfTJfZpwCnNPoh1ds7Hz+teNc7svwegn/y nJnsfQCHP20dBr5ZEB6e4nec7lIcA33m80gvj4gIgtQNdOo5e/MolZMeEbyFsT6gxgcR ECD5pkSdHQcpPrck0lx5VD0bUxfG/qagDVh24WaogDd7tq3EWvzWgqINj4mOhXkXzW9p gq9T5+fXtIMfqYIx02Dwybqs4xb1IV1SXYAY5/sOcaz4vl103ZSnhM7Jb8QjRZrdHpLj XdUHEavW4C4UAjZ6XOUdgPtz5vYS+eBOpZY+mtFpTtYxtr1SXeqNsDvyAJW0xMQqlIXM wd4Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AA6/9RnDOSa/Z71X7Pqo6+pFGyr98HndCbRaDGRoaO/p71MKOJG3HG6aVPx1CNa/Ou9rdw== X-Received: by 10.66.166.103 with SMTP id zf7mr1867772pab.178.1476146402447; Mon, 10 Oct 2016 17:40:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (97-123-215-66.albq.qwest.net. [97.123.215.66]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n7sm558994pfn.62.2016.10.10.17.40.00 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 10 Oct 2016 17:40:01 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 18:39:50 -0600 From: Nick Howell To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org, nlhowell@gmail.com Cc: nlhowell@gmail.com Message-ID: <57fc34d628e80_b64e27844fd@mercury.notmuch> In-Reply-To: <57f838f72d46b_5dbc3d83c50@mercury.notmuch> References: <20160929152116.GB17434@tuna.imca.aps.anl.gov> <57f838f72d46b_5dbc3d83c50@mercury.notmuch> Subject: Re: Status of Vim client Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 09:07:11 -0700 X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2016 00:40:04 -0000 Nick Howell wrote: > I have a few patchsets adding: > - attachment support in compose > - mailcap support for multipart messages Mildly clean (imo), independent versions of these have been sent to the mailing list; they are meant to be applied on-top of felipec's repository. (I was unaware of, and haven't looked at, the imain repo.) > - pgp support (decorations for reading, controls for composing) This is pretty messy right now, especially given that it requires patching mail-gpg and ruby-gpgme, and also uses some features command-line gpg exposes that ruby-gpgme doesn't. I don't think I can get an RFC version out for awhile. For anything to be sane, we would have to upstream to these two ruby libraries. I hope we wouldn't have to upstream to gpgme (as this would involve new code, as opposed to massaging what I already have). > - block operations on messages when searching I can probably get an RFC version of this out in a couple days. > as well as miscellaneous minor bugfixes/features. Hopefully many of these patches will disappear in the rebase/cleanup process. (Though I know where policy for rebasing is probably defined, I haven't looked at it.) I can also send out a monster mess 75-patch series, which includes everything; maybe this would be useful for folks who want to know what the finished product will look like. But it's too big and unfocused to ask RFC on it. Cheers, Nick p.s. please let me know if I broke some rule of patch mailing ettiquette, e.g. should I have included "vim:" or based the patches off of notmuch.git?