1 Return-Path: <m.walters@qmul.ac.uk>
\r
2 X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org
\r
3 Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org
\r
4 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
\r
5 by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CACB6431FB6
\r
6 for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Wed, 25 Apr 2012 10:37:14 -0700 (PDT)
\r
7 X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org
\r
11 X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.401 tagged_above=-999 required=5
\r
12 tests=[DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001,
\r
13 FREEMAIL_REPLY=2.499, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=1.2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3]
\r
15 Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1])
\r
16 by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
\r
17 with ESMTP id 1daNPuzmsI9u for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;
\r
18 Wed, 25 Apr 2012 10:37:14 -0700 (PDT)
\r
19 Received: from mail2.qmul.ac.uk (mail2.qmul.ac.uk [138.37.6.6])
\r
20 (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
\r
21 (No client certificate requested)
\r
22 by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3FC3C431FAE
\r
23 for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Wed, 25 Apr 2012 10:37:14 -0700 (PDT)
\r
24 Received: from smtp.qmul.ac.uk ([138.37.6.40])
\r
25 by mail2.qmul.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
\r
26 (envelope-from <m.walters@qmul.ac.uk>)
\r
27 id 1SN69N-00024d-Or; Wed, 25 Apr 2012 18:37:10 +0100
\r
28 Received: from 94-192-233-223.zone6.bethere.co.uk ([94.192.233.223]
\r
30 by smtp.qmul.ac.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.69)
\r
31 (envelope-from <m.walters@qmul.ac.uk>)
\r
32 id 1SN69N-0003xU-AB; Wed, 25 Apr 2012 18:37:09 +0100
\r
33 From: Mark Walters <markwalters1009@gmail.com>
\r
34 To: David Bremner <david@tethera.net>, notmuch <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>
\r
35 Subject: Re: priorities for 0.13
\r
36 In-Reply-To: <878vhkvvqi.fsf@zancas.localnet>
\r
37 References: <878vhkvvqi.fsf@zancas.localnet>
\r
38 User-Agent: Notmuch/0.12+128~g0f26d91 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.3.1
\r
39 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
\r
40 Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 18:37:27 +0100
\r
41 Message-ID: <87397r4srs.fsf@qmul.ac.uk>
\r
43 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
\r
44 X-Sender-Host-Address: 94.192.233.223
\r
45 X-QM-SPAM-Info: Sender has good ham record. :)
\r
46 X-QM-Body-MD5: c64479a90d76d32b2991778c015f0947 (of first 20000 bytes)
\r
47 X-SpamAssassin-Score: -1.2
\r
48 X-SpamAssassin-SpamBar: -
\r
49 X-SpamAssassin-Report: The QM spam filters have analysed this message to
\r
51 spam. We require at least 5.0 points to mark a message as spam.
\r
52 This message scored -1.2 points.
\r
53 Summary of the scoring:
\r
54 * -2.3 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/,
\r
56 * [138.37.6.40 listed in list.dnswl.org]
\r
57 * 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail
\r
58 provider * (markwalters1009[at]gmail.com)
\r
59 * -0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
\r
61 * 1.0 FREEMAIL_REPLY From and body contain different freemails
\r
62 * 0.1 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
\r
63 X-QM-Scan-Virus: ClamAV says the message is clean
\r
64 X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org
\r
65 X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13
\r
67 List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system."
\r
68 <notmuch.notmuchmail.org>
\r
69 List-Unsubscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/options/notmuch>,
\r
70 <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=unsubscribe>
\r
71 List-Archive: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch>
\r
72 List-Post: <mailto:notmuch@notmuchmail.org>
\r
73 List-Help: <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=help>
\r
74 List-Subscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch>,
\r
75 <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=subscribe>
\r
76 X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 17:37:14 -0000
\r
79 On Wed, 25 Apr 2012, David Bremner <david@tethera.net> wrote:
\r
82 > I'd like to have a feature freeze for 0.13 sometime in the first week of
\r
83 > May. What do people feel are priorities to try to get reviewed and
\r
87 id:"1331836090-30560-1-git-send-email-markwalters1009@gmail.com" as I
\r
88 think that is pretty close to the final piece for the exclude stuff.
\r
91 id:"1334431301-27303-1-git-send-email-markwalters1009@gmail.com" (which
\r
92 doesn't apply to master but I have a rebased version) makes excludes
\r
93 rather nicer. If anyone thinks that might be plausible I will post the
\r
96 Finally, I agree that I would like to see the html reply stuff.
\r