Return-Path: X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DEC1431FBC for ; Wed, 9 Jul 2014 16:20:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[none] autolearn=disabled Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ws17i-EwL0H6 for ; Wed, 9 Jul 2014 16:20:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from yantan.tethera.net (yantan.tethera.net [199.188.72.155]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F2FE7431FAF for ; Wed, 9 Jul 2014 16:20:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from remotemail by yantan.tethera.net with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1X519w-0002Hg-VC; Wed, 09 Jul 2014 20:20:20 -0300 Received: (nullmailer pid 25240 invoked by uid 1000); Wed, 09 Jul 2014 23:20:17 -0000 From: David Bremner To: Peter Wang , notmuch@notmuchmail.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 08/10] cli: add insert --must-index option In-Reply-To: <1397653165-15620-9-git-send-email-novalazy@gmail.com> References: <1397653165-15620-1-git-send-email-novalazy@gmail.com> <1397653165-15620-9-git-send-email-novalazy@gmail.com> User-Agent: Notmuch/0.18.1+22~gbf82697 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.3.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Date: Wed, 09 Jul 2014 20:20:17 -0300 Message-ID: <87wqbm86ha.fsf@maritornes.cs.unb.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Jul 2014 23:20:26 -0000 Peter Wang writes: > This option causes notmuch insert to fail (with exit code 3) on failure > to index the message, or failure to set the tags on the message, or if > closing (flushing) the database fails. Failure to sync tags to flags > has no effect. I don't really understand why it's OK to ignore failure to sync flags. Can you explain? Or point to a previous discussion if we already went through this? d