From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FD64431FBF for ; Thu, 25 Feb 2010 19:09:14 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.093 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.093 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.194, BAYES_50=0.001, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1] autolearn=no 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 CVdqiT7Qo8OU for ; Thu, 25 Feb 2010 19:09:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from hackervisions.org (67-207-143-141.slicehost.net [67.207.143.141]) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FAE1431FBC for ; Thu, 25 Feb 2010 19:09:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from ool-18bd392a.dyn.optonline.net ([24.189.57.42] helo=localhost) by hv with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NkqZh-0002Uf-Ci; Thu, 25 Feb 2010 22:09:09 -0500 From: James Vasile To: Carl Worth , notmuch@notmuchmail.org In-Reply-To: <87r5o8stbj.fsf@yoom.home.cworth.org> References: <87hbp5j9dv.fsf@hackervisions.org> <87r5o8stbj.fsf@yoom.home.cworth.org> Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2010 22:09:00 -0500 Message-ID: <87ocjc4rsj.fsf@hackervisions.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: Re: Initial tagging X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 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, 26 Feb 2010 03:09:14 -0000 On Thu, 25 Feb 2010 17:02:08 -0800, Carl Worth wrote: > One distinction is that I have all of my "notmuch tag" commands operate > globally rather than just on new messages. One of the things that really > annoyed be about sup was that the support for automatic tagging worked > as a hook on messages as they were processed. So I couldn't use any of > the tags for searches prior to the time that I had added a particular > tag rule. I definitely didn't want to replicate that bug. Sometimes I manually override a rule-based tag. If automatic tagging operated on old messages, overrides could be superseded. When I add automatic tag rules, I first execute them manually and globally from the command line. > To do my "global" searches quickly, I do a similar subsetting, but it's > much simpler. If I'm adding the "notmuch" tag I do "and not > tag:notmuch". We've even had the proposal of making "notmuch tag" do > that automatically. That sounds like a good idea. What happened with that proposal? > Meanwhile, I'm planning on eventually moving entirely away from any tags > that are driven entirely by searches like this. Instead, I'd like to > just have good support for "saved searches" where we have some syntax to > perform string expansion on configured search terms. Saved searches is a very good idea. I look forward to it.