Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] notmuch hooks

[Jani Nikula <jani@nikula.org>]

On Tue, 06 Dec 2011 22:16:37 -0500, Tom Prince <tom.prince@ualberta.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 06 Dec 2011 18:47:01 -0800, Jameson Graef Rollins <jrollins@finestructure.net> wrote:
> > Also, what if we make it so that the post-new hook script only runs if
> > notmuch new processes new messages?  All of my post-new functions don't
> > need to be run at all if there is no new mail.

I think the post-new hook should be run always (provided there have been
no errors). I think it might be surprising not to, and some users might
use the hook for something other than tagging.

> Or would it make sense to pass this information to the hook somehow?

It would, but as I wrote in id:"87mxb8kt5r.fsf@nikula.org", I think that
should come as another patch afterwards. I know I can't decide yet what
should be passed and how. Processed message counts (added, deleted,
renamed) could be passed on the command line, but how useful is that
really? The same can be easily achieved through initial tagging.

Message-ids could not be passed on the command line (there just can be
too many of them) so it would require setting up a pipe and feeding them
to stdin of the hook. The post-new hook should be run after the database
has been closed, but the message-ids are not saved during notmuch new
processing. Saving them for later gets complicated for not much extra
benefit in addition to creative use of initial tagging, as far as I can
see. Plus interrupting the post-new hook with this setup would screw up
your processing if it only depended on the message-ids.

All in all, I'd postpone all of this until later.


BR,
Jani.