b1/e3f3423eac594ac0f9014f97c23f5b8dab4d36

   1 Return-Path: <cworth@cworth.org>\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 EE87E429E55\r
   6         for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 15:41:10 -0700 (PDT)\r
   7 X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org\r
   8 X-Spam-Flag: NO\r
   9 X-Spam-Score: 0.01\r
  10 X-Spam-Level: \r
  11 X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.01 tagged_above=-999 required=5\r
  12         tests=[T_MIME_NO_TEXT=0.01] 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 h4YAMqaLf0QX for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;\r
  16         Tue, 28 Jun 2011 15:41:10 -0700 (PDT)\r
  17 Received: from arlo.cworth.org (arlo.cworth.org [50.43.72.2])\r
  18         by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94A24429E32\r
  19         for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 15:41:10 -0700 (PDT)\r
  20 Received: from yoom.home.cworth.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])\r
  21         by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A66229A645;\r
  22         Tue, 28 Jun 2011 15:41:09 -0700 (PDT)\r
  23 Received: by yoom.home.cworth.org (Postfix, from userid 1000)\r
  24         id 5B9B72541A8; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 15:41:09 -0700 (PDT)\r
  25 From: Carl Worth <cworth@cworth.org>\r
  26 To: Dmitry Kurochkin <dmitry.kurochkin@gmail.com>,\r
  27         Austin Clements <amdragon@MIT.EDU>\r
  28 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] test: use emacsclient(1) for Emacs tests\r
  29 In-Reply-To: <87mxh1y97a.fsf@gmail.com>\r
  30 References: <1309132379-24089-1-git-send-email-dmitry.kurochkin@gmail.com>\r
  31         <1309146846-30991-1-git-send-email-dmitry.kurochkin@gmail.com>\r
  32         <1309146846-30991-2-git-send-email-dmitry.kurochkin@gmail.com>\r
  33         <BANLkTi=nwHRndz367K5oh4=tPaU-KNeZ8Q@mail.gmail.com>\r
  34         <87hb7byqge.fsf@gmail.com> <87d3hyzs1c.fsf@gmail.com>\r
  35         <20110628034937.GB4120@mit.edu> <20110628162257.GD4120@mit.edu>\r
  36         <871uydzz3x.fsf@gmail.com> <87zkl190od.fsf@yoom.home.cworth.org>\r
  37         <87mxh1y97a.fsf@gmail.com>\r
  38 User-Agent: Notmuch/0.5 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.3.1\r
  39         (i486-pc-linux-gnu)\r
  40 Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 15:41:09 -0700\r
  41 Message-ID: <874o398tq2.fsf@yoom.home.cworth.org>\r
  42 MIME-Version: 1.0\r
  43 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";\r
  44         micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"\r
  45 Cc: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
  46 X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
  47 X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13\r
  48 Precedence: list\r
  49 List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system."\r
  50         <notmuch.notmuchmail.org>\r
  51 List-Unsubscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/options/notmuch>,\r
  52         <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=unsubscribe>\r
  53 List-Archive: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch>\r
  54 List-Post: <mailto:notmuch@notmuchmail.org>\r
  55 List-Help: <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=help>\r
  56 List-Subscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch>,\r
  57         <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=subscribe>\r
  58 X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 22:41:11 -0000\r
  59 \r
  60 --=-=-=\r
  61 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable\r
  62 \r
  63 On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 00:47:37 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin <dmitry.kurochkin@gmai=\r
  64 l.com> wrote:\r
  65 > > "more robust against leaving daemon's around for some reason", etc.\r
  66 >=20\r
  67 > Not sure I agree with this.\r
  68 \r
  69 I'm sorry. I wasn't clear.\r
  70 \r
  71 I wasn't advocating one solution over the other. I was just giving an\r
  72 example of the kind of technical merits on which I would like to see the\r
  73 approaches evaluated.\r
  74 \r
  75 I care about the robustness of the approach here. I'm less inclined to\r
  76 care about the "messiness" of the implementation (however that is\r
  77 measured).\r
  78 \r
  79 If both approaches are equally robust, then I'll take your word for it,\r
  80 and that's great.\r
  81 \r
  82 =2DCarl\r
  83 \r
  84 =2D-=20\r
  85 carl.d.worth@intel.com\r
  86 \r
  87 --=-=-=\r
  88 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature\r
  89 \r
  90 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----\r
  91 Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)\r
  92 \r
  93 iEYEARECAAYFAk4KWIUACgkQ6JDdNq8qSWhkjgCfTN+XWfHDC/zyRMXqkdFXSi+d\r
  94 BqsAoIhWJjCTgVF/qNQZLAX8ZivgOTVG\r
  95 =ULHf\r
  96 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----\r
  97 --=-=-=--\r