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 EF5756DE0FB6 for ; Thu, 10 Aug 2017 23:04:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at cworth.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.049 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.049 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.049] 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 rDRuL3orvFpS for ; Thu, 10 Aug 2017 23:04:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from che.mayfirst.org (che.mayfirst.org [162.247.75.118]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29ABE6DE0C97 for ; Thu, 10 Aug 2017 23:04:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fifthhorseman.net (ool-6c3a0662.static.optonline.net [108.58.6.98]) by che.mayfirst.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D9B3EF9A1; Fri, 11 Aug 2017 02:04:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: by fifthhorseman.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 6A6A220505; Fri, 11 Aug 2017 00:49:11 -0400 (EDT) From: Daniel Kahn Gillmor To: David Bremner , Notmuch Mail Subject: Re: associating a property with a subpart of a message In-Reply-To: <87y3qu3pkf.fsf@tethera.net> References: <87wp6lbl0u.fsf@fifthhorseman.net> <87y3qu3pkf.fsf@tethera.net> Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2017 00:49:08 -0400 Message-ID: <87valupv3v.fsf@fifthhorseman.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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, 11 Aug 2017 06:04:59 -0000 --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain On Tue 2017-08-08 14:02:56 -0400, David Bremner wrote: > A hybrid option would be to use a hash of the file + 1.2.1.1. address > scheme. My thinking here is a bit vague, but I can imagine such has hash > being useful either for content addressible mailstore, or for > disambiguating message-id collisions. hm, interesting. That would mean that you'd basically never get to confidently reuse properties (because every copy of a mail you get likely differs by some received headers), whereas for some normal mails where you get multiple copies if you were just hashing the part then you'd get the same thing. otoh, if you're going to hash a part, that raises the question of whether you're hashing the headers as well as the body of that part, and its possible that those headers are being rewritten someplace. I suppose the other approach would be to just opportunistically try the cached data as long as the message-id is the same thing, though. is there an easy way to get the hash of the file that contains the message from notmuch automagically? do we need to worry about mbox files as well? I welcome any other ideas or suggestions! --dkg --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEEOCdgUepHf6PklTkyFJitxsGSMjcFAlmNN0QACgkQFJitxsGS Mjfnqw//UsKCFSgcY9ro/BGhOpZfrFdxzEd6QOD5rENOXYgi0AREkIPMjMrn3a3Y TcgercFrV+29GdPsTujR7vTzyWw482Kz/FkqSAvLPK3rYapQLK1NK3XHEhrxL+XL bpJQO8m2LeRa8H0HZ4XWteu3jLvOkr4KZBNXQi0l+0p3p7F5jx74LTMBN8SV5QYV fApW0zpWicAy7a9rdUSI1ez3GOz8oa0YXFZ89sHtm/4GKdNc5Az2R1dY0EQJ9R9U W4qWRAzbvZ0ZhpVxKZKUYgGoM72re+ynQuTriRhngZlptOJYK3QSOWXTYChaftYj 3+0po5TrEA7K/gUslxzvii8irmW6Rq7cr9Y+dJSXbwlhfBhBYNyyqXAGcOTZcXwb SSjdu76FdIgTVb70G4MT8r1+vnDvpn81w+tcIVnBPot1x0GW+4WSsPi+bozct/bL ZZiDLrk53g5R67nMk8MlHlwSyNsLh9IPsM2MmOf1MMOX/kO8YNFAvbOLBUKmmQua uwecJm5GIy4quzYCunlYbZqHHGpMVgXfvmAik+HUPDV8G6oc3hifAnrTvUCBMiPN 5Ql7CUToFScYSf3G6o8Pax3cU5VwZPXx3Iyb8vZ6cGf1PLToyRbEiNSSGmMTFt10 rq7UxY1jfAevaosLyNza7+vDK3rTjDz+7Ogm1THtTXYwW+vsEX4= =ULaE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--