1 Return-Path: <david@tethera.net>
\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 14548431FB6
\r
6 for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Sun, 24 Aug 2014 16:03:33 -0700 (PDT)
\r
7 X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org
\r
11 X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[none]
\r
13 Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1])
\r
14 by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
\r
15 with ESMTP id 5lcIJk2kWzhW for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;
\r
16 Sun, 24 Aug 2014 16:03:29 -0700 (PDT)
\r
17 Received: from yantan.tethera.net (yantan.tethera.net [199.188.72.155])
\r
18 (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits))
\r
19 (No client certificate requested)
\r
20 by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 37412431FAE
\r
21 for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Sun, 24 Aug 2014 16:03:29 -0700 (PDT)
\r
22 Received: from remotemail by yantan.tethera.net with local (Exim 4.80)
\r
23 (envelope-from <david@tethera.net>)
\r
24 id 1XLgoq-0007Al-1X; Sun, 24 Aug 2014 20:03:28 -0300
\r
25 Received: (nullmailer pid 5134 invoked by uid 1000); Sun, 24 Aug 2014
\r
27 From: David Bremner <david@tethera.net>
\r
28 To: Austin Clements <amdragon@mit.edu>
\r
29 Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 04/13] lib: Database version 3: Introduce fine-grained
\r
31 In-Reply-To: <20140824221629.GP3015@mit.edu>
\r
32 References: <1406859003-11561-1-git-send-email-amdragon@mit.edu>
\r
33 <1406859003-11561-5-git-send-email-amdragon@mit.edu>
\r
34 <87ppfqsv8s.fsf@maritornes.cs.unb.ca>
\r
35 <87fvgmg0tx.fsf@awakening.csail.mit.edu>
\r
36 <87zjeu4jyp.fsf@maritornes.cs.unb.ca> <20140824221629.GP3015@mit.edu>
\r
37 User-Agent: Notmuch/0.18.1+72~g028c560 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.3.1
\r
38 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
\r
39 Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2014 16:03:23 -0700
\r
40 Message-ID: <871ts5mqx0.fsf@maritornes.cs.unb.ca>
\r
42 Content-Type: text/plain
\r
43 Cc: notmuch@notmuchmail.org
\r
44 X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org
\r
45 X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13
\r
47 List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system."
\r
48 <notmuch.notmuchmail.org>
\r
49 List-Unsubscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/options/notmuch>,
\r
50 <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=unsubscribe>
\r
51 List-Archive: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch>
\r
52 List-Post: <mailto:notmuch@notmuchmail.org>
\r
53 List-Help: <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=help>
\r
54 List-Subscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch>,
\r
55 <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=subscribe>
\r
56 X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2014 23:03:33 -0000
\r
58 Austin Clements <amdragon@mit.edu> writes:
\r
60 > Quoth David Bremner on Aug 23 at 8:58 pm:
\r
61 >> Austin Clements <amdragon@mit.edu> writes:
\r
63 >> >>> @@ -1048,7 +1164,8 @@ notmuch_database_get_version (notmuch_database_t *notmuch)
\r
64 >> >>> notmuch_bool_t
\r
65 >> >>> notmuch_database_needs_upgrade (notmuch_database_t *notmuch)
\r
67 >> >>> - return notmuch->needs_upgrade;
\r
68 >> >>> + return notmuch->mode == NOTMUCH_DATABASE_MODE_READ_WRITE &&
\r
69 >> >>> + (NOTMUCH_FEATURES_CURRENT & ~notmuch->features);
\r
72 >> >> Maybe I'm not thinking hard enough here, but how does this deal with a
\r
73 >> >> feature that is needed to open a database in read only mode? Maybe it
\r
74 >> >> needs a comment for people not as clever as Austin ;).
\r
76 >> > I'm not quite sure what you mean. notmuch_database_needs_upgrade
\r
77 >> > returns false for read-only databases because you can't upgrade a
\r
78 >> > read-only database. This was true before this patch, too, though it was
\r
79 >> > less obvious. (Maybe that's not what you're asking?)
\r
81 >> Yes, that's what I was asking. I guess it's orthogonal to your patch
\r
82 >> series, but the logic of returning FALSE for read only databases is not
\r
83 >> very intuitive to me (in the sense that "needs upgrade" is not the
\r
84 >> opposite of "can't be upgraded". Your new comment later in the series
\r
85 >> is better, but it would IMHO be even better if you mentioned the read
\r
88 > That's a good point. Ideally this should be
\r
89 > "notmuch_database_can_upgrade" or something, which I think would
\r
90 > capture exactly what it means after this series. However, I don't
\r
91 > think it's worth breaking API compatibility given that this is already
\r
92 > how callers use this function (even though that violates the current
\r
95 > So, how's this for a more updated doc comment on needs_upgrade?
\r