From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <bremner@unb.ca>
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CF77431FB6
	for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Thu, 28 Jun 2012 08:13:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[none]
	autolearn=disabled
Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1])
	by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id C4ULgslHLU3A for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;
	Thu, 28 Jun 2012 08:13:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tesseract.cs.unb.ca (tesseract.cs.unb.ca [131.202.240.238])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BE8A1431FAF
	for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Thu, 28 Jun 2012 08:13:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fctnnbsc30w-156034089108.dhcp-dynamic.fibreop.nb.bellaliant.net
	([156.34.89.108] helo=zancas.localnet)
	by tesseract.cs.unb.ca with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
	(Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <bremner@unb.ca>)
	id 1SkGPc-0001sr-LY; Thu, 28 Jun 2012 12:13:40 -0300
Received: from bremner by zancas.localnet with local (Exim 4.77)
	(envelope-from <bremner@unb.ca>)
	id 1SkGPX-0005AZ-5Z; Thu, 28 Jun 2012 12:13:35 -0300
From: David Bremner <david@tethera.net>
To: Ethan <ethan.glasser.camp@gmail.com>,
	Mark Walters <markwalters1009@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/14] modular mail stores based on URIs
In-Reply-To: <CAOJ+Ob0Kw0Kkhh9C27Xv9gvqtNowzQiNqrLAtvti7fL8NND2+w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1340656899-5644-1-git-send-email-ethan@betacantrips.com>
	<877gutnmf1.fsf@qmul.ac.uk>
	<CAOJ+Ob0Kw0Kkhh9C27Xv9gvqtNowzQiNqrLAtvti7fL8NND2+w@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Notmuch/0.13.2 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.4.1
	(x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 12:13:35 -0300
Message-ID: <87hatvlba8.fsf@zancas.localnet>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Spam_bar: -
Cc: notmuch@notmuchmail.org
X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system."
	<notmuch.notmuchmail.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/options/notmuch>,
	<mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch>
List-Post: <mailto:notmuch@notmuchmail.org>
List-Help: <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch>,
	<mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 15:13:42 -0000

Ethan <ethan.glasser.camp@gmail.com> writes:
>
> Yeah, I don't even know how an mbox message gets flagged read and I don't
> know how I would support it.
>

I think read only access to mboxes is fine. Yes, somebody will be
unhappy, but the only convincing argument I have heard for mboxes or
similar formats is archival use.

d