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 584FB6DE10D1 for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 18:13:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at cworth.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.026 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.026 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.025, 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 imupOZljinPC for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 18:13:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fethera.tethera.net (fethera.tethera.net [198.245.60.197]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 096556DE10CC for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 18:13:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from remotemail by fethera.tethera.net with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hHI5m-0004Ba-Vi; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 21:13:27 -0400 Received: (nullmailer pid 14865 invoked by uid 1000); Fri, 19 Apr 2019 01:13:25 -0000 From: David Bremner To: Ralph Seichter , notmuch@notmuchmail.org Subject: Re: Unexpected output of "notmuch new --quiet" In-Reply-To: <87ftqfctf0.fsf@ra.horus-it.com> References: <87imvc5pvg.fsf@ra.horus-it.com> <87bm14gqib.fsf@tethera.net> <87y3471ml9.fsf@ra.horus-it.com> <87d0ljfnlz.fsf@tethera.net> <87ftqfctf0.fsf@ra.horus-it.com> Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2019 22:13:25 -0300 Message-ID: <877ebqg5l6.fsf@tethera.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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: Fri, 19 Apr 2019 01:13:32 -0000 Ralph Seichter writes: > * David Bremner: > >> I guess if you have a simple way of distinguishing the cases which you >> want to consider as errrors, we can revisit the idea. > > Personally, I'd go with these decreasing levels of severity: [snip] > I don't know if this is a fit for Notmuch, but it would be great if I > could prevent warnings and notices from being reported by using a > command line option. > Just to be clear, I was referring in the question of deciding for specific messages, which ones are serious and which ones are not. Are there warnings that you want to suppress that are not handleable with the new.ignore facility? d