23/6f0f47050ac8b5b12dcd4a3999cf543bbc0b24

   1 Return-Path: <jrollins@finestructure.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 0D5AC431FCF\r
   6         for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Tue,  2 Feb 2010 08:53:00 -0800 (PST)\r
   7 X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org\r
   8 X-Spam-Flag: NO\r
   9 X-Spam-Score: -3.306\r
  10 X-Spam-Level: \r
  11 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.306 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.693,\r
  12         BAYES_50=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] autolearn=ham\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 gQd8++KK3jEu for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;\r
  16         Tue,  2 Feb 2010 08:52:59 -0800 (PST)\r
  17 Received: from brinza.cc.columbia.edu (brinza.cc.columbia.edu [128.59.29.8])\r
  18         by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50D0B431FCB\r
  19         for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Tue,  2 Feb 2010 08:52:59 -0800 (PST)\r
  20 Received: from servo.finestructure.net (geco.phys.columbia.edu\r
  21         [128.59.170.159])\r
  22         (user=jgr2110 author=jrollins@finestructure.net mech=PLAIN bits=0)\r
  23         by brinza.cc.columbia.edu (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o12GqkC9004415\r
  24         (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT);\r
  25         Tue, 2 Feb 2010 11:52:56 -0500 (EST)\r
  26 Received: from jrollins by servo.finestructure.net with local (Exim 4.71)\r
  27         (envelope-from <jrollins@finestructure.net>)\r
  28         id 1NcLza-0001Oq-EY; Tue, 02 Feb 2010 11:52:46 -0500\r
  29 From: Jameson Rollins <jrollins@finestructure.net>\r
  30 To: Michal Sojka <sojkam1@fel.cvut.cz>, notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
  31 In-Reply-To: <87eil3ehjh.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>\r
  32 References: <201001291049.21048.sojkam1@fel.cvut.cz>\r
  33         <1265122868-12133-1-git-send-email-sojkam1@fel.cvut.cz>\r
  34         <87eil3ehjh.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>\r
  35 Date: Tue, 02 Feb 2010 11:52:43 -0500\r
  36 Message-ID: <87636feg10.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>\r
  37 MIME-Version: 1.0\r
  38 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";\r
  39         micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"\r
  40 X-No-Spam-Score: Local\r
  41 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.68 on 128.59.29.8\r
  42 Subject: Re: [notmuch] [PATCHv2] Preserve folder information when indexing\r
  43 X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
  44 X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13\r
  45 Precedence: list\r
  46 List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system."\r
  47         <notmuch.notmuchmail.org>\r
  48 List-Unsubscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/options/notmuch>,\r
  49         <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=unsubscribe>\r
  50 List-Archive: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch>\r
  51 List-Post: <mailto:notmuch@notmuchmail.org>\r
  52 List-Help: <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=help>\r
  53 List-Subscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch>,\r
  54         <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=subscribe>\r
  55 X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Feb 2010 16:53:00 -0000\r
  56 \r
  57 --=-=-=\r
  58 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable\r
  59 \r
  60 On Tue, 02 Feb 2010 11:20:02 -0500, Jameson Rollins <jrollins@finestructure=\r
  61 .net> wrote:\r
  62 > I just gave it a try, though, and it seemed to be behaving a little\r
  63 > strangely.  I currently have two subdirectories, "inbox" and "sent".\r
  64 > However, new mail to either directory was showing up under the search:\r
  65 >=20\r
  66 > notmuch search folder:inbox\r
  67 >=20\r
  68 > and nothing was showing up under the search:\r
  69 >=20\r
  70 > notmuch search folder:sent\r
  71 >=20\r
  72 > I wonder if there's a problem with the logic it uses to determine the\r
  73 > folder naming?  Do you think you could look into this?  I would really\r
  74 > like to push to have a patch like this applied upstream soon.\r
  75 \r
  76 I think I was wrong about this.  It looks like I'm seeing a different\r
  77 issue that may not be related.  As a test I was sending mail to myself,\r
  78 which meant that it was showing up in both "inbox" *and* "sent", and it\r
  79 looks like in the face of an email in duplicate directories, the "inbox"\r
  80 was winning.  Mail sent to not me is showing up under folder:sent just\r
  81 fine.  So I think this is working!\r
  82 \r
  83 jamie.\r
  84 \r
  85 --=-=-=\r
  86 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature\r
  87 \r
  88 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----\r
  89 Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)\r
  90 \r
  91 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJLaFhbAAoJEO00zqvie6q8PNwP/17WfG/g1lYlURWBMf3oDcXl\r
  92 VyCHbCoTrYF5ym3vOMyYRyO8zjd/rZXSWwaKXdSflzGfHQAO3QHDIOmtuD84NUmG\r
  93 lICTOgn1BUYTTOif0vSb+c283MJNfsqAW0fAkgXFzPQhXUn7ASIOmQnqVpdG3K3T\r
  94 cTBPoyxedrH/BcK2tUzS6oi07fLFdNQeNng79nn3Ug0n1u0pgrunicmjr6bKe1zb\r
  95 rW5fw5ly9VXXHCINX16u43s6iWbuu1nCQVBAHcopR9Yi0hr1H3GvG9WInpacpmFo\r
  96 aT9U85/FmyP0hBm6y/Osdbk8mRYo3S5noOi4549dcLhDmOH1J8IWa+KPLWpMO5mf\r
  97 Q+8KMp+KWdHOj8ZrcoiWH4vbwPe/oxOpJfMN6dzHVBT1Qn58i041nx9oFCcZG+dT\r
  98 vuumHeSpjANM0olCkcxHkuDtK3Wa+xYsJ/D8YFfaOexJjsiMksi6mCe1RDIbZxYT\r
  99 83KX2XpQk77SiQ2mSiEFv8xo5LE7N7r7PZcGPSeWXReHCfcB2HGURyeqUSwBb2oN\r
 100 YGOlQaiJkhRzLFWl5fZxBVfc/eEBzqTsNulir0fGy1wR70SGk+GS4f0Omv94XEPi\r
 101 FzSVQqJzxH6RmyOiDb+Qlb3vvqO/75/LI3IXbcSJsl5N9HP7wavOErv4WppGIg99\r
 102 J10vd1kDreSPO5KurYRC\r
 103 =7MXu\r
 104 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----\r
 105 --=-=-=--\r