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 7EB1B431FBC
\r
6 for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Wed, 24 Feb 2010 06:56:21 -0800 (PST)
\r
7 X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org
\r
11 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.035 tagged_above=-999 required=5
\r
12 tests=[AWL=-0.036, 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 SdV3yWx4D7+N for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;
\r
16 Wed, 24 Feb 2010 06:56:20 -0800 (PST)
\r
17 Received: from serrano.cc.columbia.edu (serrano.cc.columbia.edu [128.59.29.6])
\r
18 by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA499431FAE
\r
19 for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Wed, 24 Feb 2010 06:56:20 -0800 (PST)
\r
20 Received: from servo.finestructure.net (geco.phys.columbia.edu
\r
22 (user=jgr2110 author=jrollins@finestructure.net mech=PLAIN bits=0)
\r
23 by serrano.cc.columbia.edu (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o1OEuGcv023750
\r
24 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT);
\r
25 Wed, 24 Feb 2010 09:56:16 -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 1NkIeu-00010w-6w; Wed, 24 Feb 2010 09:56:16 -0500
\r
29 From: Jameson Rollins <jrollins@finestructure.net>
\r
30 To: racin@free.fr, Sebastian Spaeth <Sebastian@SSpaeth.de>
\r
32 <74981806.5014941267021638774.JavaMail.root@zimbra1-e1.priv.proxad.net>
\r
34 <74981806.5014941267021638774.JavaMail.root@zimbra1-e1.priv.proxad.net>
\r
35 Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2010 09:56:09 -0500
\r
36 Message-ID: <878wai3com.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>
\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 128.59.29.6
\r
42 Cc: notmuch@notmuchmail.org
\r
43 Subject: Re: [notmuch] JSON output as default [was: Re: [PATCH] Add an
\r
44 "--output=(json|text|)" command-line option...]
\r
45 X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org
\r
46 X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13
\r
48 List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system."
\r
49 <notmuch.notmuchmail.org>
\r
50 List-Unsubscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/options/notmuch>,
\r
51 <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=unsubscribe>
\r
52 List-Archive: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch>
\r
53 List-Post: <mailto:notmuch@notmuchmail.org>
\r
54 List-Help: <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=help>
\r
55 List-Subscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch>,
\r
56 <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=subscribe>
\r
57 X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2010 14:56:21 -0000
\r
60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
\r
62 On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 15:27:18 +0100 (CET), racin@free.fr wrote:
\r
63 > > > I definitely want to be able to pipe single-field lists coming from
\r
64 > > > notmuch to grep, xargs, shell for loops, etc. without having to
\r
68 > > While I would love to see JSON (even by default), I agree. If I just
\r
69 > > want to code up a notmuch-based address book with sth like:
\r
71 > > notmuch show to:Diana --output=3Dto --sort=3Drelevance --limit=3D20
\r
73 > > just getting back a plain list of mail addresses is the easiest to
\r
76 > This would also be useful for the Emacs/Vim interfaces. For instance, my =
\r
77 smart completion patch
\r
78 > would really benefit from notmuch being capable of outputing various fiel=
\r
79 ds in all messages in plain text
\r
80 > separated by newlines (this is even easier to handle in emacs code than J=
\r
81 SON). In fact, most of the C code I had
\r
82 > to write for this patch is better replaced by the --output option...
\r
84 Ok, I'm convinced. I can see how they're both useful. I had been
\r
85 thinking more about the fact that text output isn't so useful for
\r
86 multiline content (like message content), but I can see how it would be
\r
87 useful for single line output.
\r
89 I had also been thinking about the fact that the current "text" output,
\r
90 specifically for the "show" command, *is* structured, but just not
\r
91 according to any standard that I know of. If the output is going to be
\r
92 structured (ie. "show" output) then it should be in JSON format. If
\r
93 not, like the output of a single field that is a single line, then
\r
94 having text output is definitely useful.
\r
99 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
\r
101 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
\r
102 Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
\r
104 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJLhT4KAAoJEO00zqvie6q8ecQP/RQkakG2wZzhPsP4TvKhaNqn
\r
105 J8kwCHgKflf2JsGxHIhbkfwikGpad4OulaRFoTVmsVHcAhhCy2oF9jqeFO/vgNJE
\r
106 aVFckPrOIpgappRKuXKqAO1HYcFGyJKyFu45LczgKtnrGaW2vmKRIy2+lEHbbHUW
\r
107 TyBi8QOFP6z4WLyv+xow+kkph8itPtB8G/0X7aWSzqCxZWptjyG/q/XBCSg69//9
\r
108 uKjQ2sUfVNNcqwKVayh2Fm7+KDMj48Im8pYhaymFocH0N8MB4iJtmsEioM7SPKGV
\r
109 VcW0pv2YRJ5RwU/G81aaktqHN37H/5AbQKv3CFW3PRgHk7M0ux1hhVncUK2fv5ta
\r
110 Fo7jsMz6gw+FUQ4zWzHNE+Z3vECkSKgZhAGQnCcExkod7UFQ+aBlWaY16AfRSVJ+
\r
111 UPHX8EjpDnDqRINsLUJGEUcyId0LfQEGDmS/v+C3rudd3vhMb3lqMg42yEVIMMLT
\r
112 MKwAPr0E7/LWYY4Ejxd4fQtZ/YA21fFO16Ekn5NXZwFnTU/53o2QaxIOvkYYpBKL
\r
113 rLR5B5LOCJKOrz/GEpHz5XbBsT9aJYEm/7sn36NaC9l/oQ0/U7zc2M+u/HTRv1ll
\r
114 LcgUDUye5k5VKfWDRHfU/Wk+OJ69yNvt/zrSxHmQaU2PLHITanQlgcBASqKWR4i7
\r
115 +gUCzZ1d/ym5dVl79zIt
\r
117 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
\r