1 Return-Path: <jason@jasonwoof.com>
\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 BE7D4431FD0
\r
6 for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 09:39:19 -0700 (PDT)
\r
7 X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org
\r
11 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5
\r
12 tests=[RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=disabled
\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 rH-dovlt2v7f for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;
\r
16 Tue, 23 Aug 2011 09:39:18 -0700 (PDT)
\r
17 Received: from mail-qy0-f174.google.com (mail-qy0-f174.google.com
\r
18 [209.85.216.174]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
\r
19 (No client certificate requested)
\r
20 by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 526F7431FB6
\r
21 for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 09:39:18 -0700 (PDT)
\r
22 Received: by qyk38 with SMTP id 38so2617827qyk.5
\r
23 for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 09:39:15 -0700 (PDT)
\r
24 Received: by 10.224.194.194 with SMTP id dz2mr2495272qab.58.1314117554924;
\r
25 Tue, 23 Aug 2011 09:39:14 -0700 (PDT)
\r
26 Received: from lemote.jasonwoof.com (rrcs-50-75-61-2.nys.biz.rr.com
\r
28 by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id m11sm83657qcw.7.2011.08.23.09.39.13
\r
29 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
\r
30 Tue, 23 Aug 2011 09:39:14 -0700 (PDT)
\r
31 Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 12:39:09 -0400
\r
32 From: Jason Woofenden <jason@jasonwoof.com>
\r
33 To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org
\r
34 Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] add user friendly date range search
\r
35 Message-ID: <20110823163908.GD2968@lemote.jasonwoof.com>
\r
36 Mail-Followup-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org
\r
37 References: <cover.1312964528.git.jani@nikula.org>
\r
38 <87bovryqp0.fsf@steelpick.2x.cz>
\r
40 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
\r
41 Content-Disposition: inline
\r
42 In-Reply-To: <87bovryqp0.fsf@steelpick.2x.cz>
\r
43 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
\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: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 16:39:19 -0000
\r
58 Here's my thoughts on date/range syntax:
\r
60 I think: date:monday should show only e-mails that arrived on
\r
61 monday (not also emails that arrived since then.) Because that's
\r
62 what it looks like it does.
\r
64 I think a very common use of date ranges will be from some time
\r
65 until now. So I'd like that to be easy. I suggest this syntax:
\r
69 which would be a shorthand for:
\r
71 date:monday-00:00:00..now
\r
73 If that's not a popular idea, then we should at least be able to
\r
74 use this shorthand for the same:
\r
78 Also, I think it's quite valuable to have "yesterday" work as a
\r