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 7CD174196F2 for ; Mon, 12 Apr 2010 10:15:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.499 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.499 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 usy0sv-eBjXM for ; Mon, 12 Apr 2010 10:15:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-gy0-f181.google.com (mail-gy0-f181.google.com [209.85.160.181]) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 829C7431FC1 for ; Mon, 12 Apr 2010 10:15:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by gyg8 with SMTP id 8so3093488gyg.26 for ; Mon, 12 Apr 2010 10:15:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:received:in-reply-to :references:date:x-google-sender-auth:received:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=7NiVbav4zM6rYmLUlZRNxnyejdrsV7FOpTBrhuhbhGo=; b=DhbjSJU0Gsvc7zfzKB2HUzpR2LEIGrtHBq2TPDHkunKra5DP4N+SI796xEN25oTXac Euzbw0DLPddl1wFF6YX17vuyC9pcBZlamxej2ba1krhHPutfmydHpX5gPPi3hPSLk1Cg ks6LmqI2AohtpwtIx6HnEIjL23ifboym5tq+A= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=Vr+S6iUoBsooE1MVErctznRtwaJFhyWmFv5WuaV3pnXTW5uYzl+lL5Xw/zGKah9mtu GeDs/yEHaSULF8Vh+IwjOmpB3NMJ3NO5xpdYJI30KjfpR3tA+1cSvTl+r/Kp3rvkopjf 5tzL4UEcLLd3bxZResUPGSRcljUGtYSM+Hcdo= MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: anthony.j.towns@gmail.com Received: by 10.90.114.1 with HTTP; Mon, 12 Apr 2010 10:15:28 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87ljcsekc4.fsf@servo.finestructure.net> References: <871velp0be.fsf@SSpaeth.de> <87y6gseval.fsf@servo.finestructure.net> <87633wbt9f.fsf@steelpick.2x.cz> <87ljcsekc4.fsf@servo.finestructure.net> Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 03:15:28 +1000 X-Google-Sender-Auth: f6d656652fee349b Received: by 10.91.154.4 with SMTP id g4mr1959970ago.26.1271092528804; Mon, 12 Apr 2010 10:15:28 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] notmuch new --new-tags=tags... From: Anthony Towns To: notmuch Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 17:15:31 -0000 On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 01:55, Jameson Rollins wrote: > On Mon, 12 Apr 2010 17:11:24 +0200, Michal Sojka wr= ote: >> The problem I see with this approach is, that all notmuch searches are >> build around Xapian. ... > This does sound like a potential issue. =A0I definitely don't understand > how new messages are added to the database. =A0I was mostly suggesting a > syntax for adding tag as new messages are added, though, not that an > actual xapian search term. =A0I don't know if they can be decoupled, > though. If you say "they're just notmuch tag commands applied at new time" you expect to have the same search behaviour as Xapian... Maybe you could do that by temporarily inserting the mail into an "inmemory" Xapian database, since you're only checking to see if that particular one matches. On the other hand, maybe having it be a separate syntax would be good -- then you could justify using information notmuch doesn't usually have -- like file/path names, Received or Delivered-To headers, and so on. On the gripping hand, maybe "notmuch tag" should simply be fast enough that running a bunch of them after "notmuch new" isn't an issue. Cheers, aj --=20 Anthony Towns