From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp1 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id iMemCZO07F/XZwAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 30 Dec 2020 17:10:43 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp1 with LMTPS id AO5hBZO07F8ANAAAbx9fmQ (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 30 Dec 2020 17:10:43 +0000 Received: from mail.notmuchmail.org (nmbug.tethera.net [144.217.243.247]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 856A69403C5 for ; Wed, 30 Dec 2020 17:10:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from nmbug.tethera.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.notmuchmail.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3F3629D05; Wed, 30 Dec 2020 12:10:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from mail.hostpark.net (mail.hostpark.net [212.243.197.30]) by mail.notmuchmail.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1CAFF29CED for ; Wed, 30 Dec 2020 12:10:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.hostpark.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B980D7955; Wed, 30 Dec 2020 18:10:25 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=bernoul.li; h= content-type:content-type:mime-version:message-id:date:date :references:in-reply-to:subject:subject:from:from:received :received; s=sel2011a; t=1609348225; bh=7F5b4YEG80vGYsJpeL0G82td sTB0cq6xCYPg5U47IuM=; b=Ps0DNRyGIROetN6AZUeCqAbgIMjR+mu8VIjn5tbm ZXgYUIoVaDysSOurJ8B8Ubz5GKzyxTF4BPEobDY9yAgvlyJPKtG90emX2P00FHn+ nD3XQEh7NDL7WCtu9HU2nUBWFt8u80pyEI5xLQ/7pcWTkKEiZoV+zFZqPGCYtn60 Te4= X-Virus-Scanned: by Hostpark/NetZone Mailprotection at hostpark.net Received: from mail.hostpark.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail0.hostpark.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10224) with ESMTP id S7ZOpZINeDSH; Wed, 30 Dec 2020 18:10:25 +0100 (CET) Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail.hostpark.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5B4B7165C9; Wed, 30 Dec 2020 18:10:25 +0100 (CET) From: Jonas Bernoulli To: Tomi Ollila , notmuch@notmuchmail.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/32] [emacs] Add outline headings and switch to lexical scope In-Reply-To: References: <20201214162401.19569-1-jonas@bernoul.li> Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 18:10:23 +0100 Message-ID: <87k0szfce8.fsf@bernoul.li> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID-Hash: 4QQDCB6DAQNFPLBYJUJJNF5KNNGP2QZS X-Message-ID-Hash: 4QQDCB6DAQNFPLBYJUJJNF5KNNGP2QZS X-MailFrom: jonas@bernoul.li X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-notmuch.notmuchmail.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; suspicious-header X-Mailman-Version: 3.2.1 Precedence: list List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Spam-Score: 0.45 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail (body hash did not verify) header.d=bernoul.li header.s=sel2011a header.b=Ps0DNRyG; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of notmuch-bounces@notmuchmail.org designates 144.217.243.247 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=notmuch-bounces@notmuchmail.org X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 856A69403C5 X-Spam-Score: 0.45 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn1.migadu.com X-TUID: OVm6h3Qy3mtZ Tomi Ollila writes: > The patch series did not apply for me (fully) anymore. Since you got it applied now I am not sending a second iteration just yet, or should I? By the way, a regularly rebased version can be found in the "pending" branch at https://github.com/tarsiiformes/notmuch.git. Currently it ends with two additional commits that are not from this patch series but which I have submitted separately (their commit messages are prefixed with "[copy]"). > I like the series (on paper), 2 comments :D > In patch 23/32, line Fixed > Then, I personally don't see enough point for requiring subr-x > just just for changing (string= foo "") to (string-empty-p). If > there were more features picked from subr-x then that would be > different... I was on the fence about that too. I left it in for now but have no problems removing it before merge. Thanks for taking a look, Jonas