From: Dirk Hohndel <hohndel@infradead.org>
To: Jameson Rollins <jrollins@finestructure.net>, Carl Worth
	<cworth@cworth.org>, notmuch@notmuchmail.org
Subject: Re: Plans for the 0.2 release (this week)
In-Reply-To: <87tyrmavoc.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>
References: <8739z6rjxf.fsf@yoom.home.cworth.org>
	<87tyrmavoc.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>
Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2010 07:58:47 -0700
Message-ID: <m3tyrmgfdk.fsf@x200.gr8dns.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Precedence: list

On Thu, 08 Apr 2010 10:03:15 -0400, Jameson Rollins <jrollins@finestructure.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 07 Apr 2010 15:12:44 -0700, Carl Worth <cworth@cworth.org> wrote:
> > For the upcoming 0.2 release, here are some things that I would like to
> > have in place:
> > 
> >   * Changes to indexing, (addition of body:, folder:, list:, etc.). This
> >     is stuff that I'll work on.
> 
> Also, fwiw, the folder: indexing is probably the new feature that I'm
> most eagerly awaiting.  I've got all these ideas for ways to handle sent
> mail and drafts if we can get this working.

Maybe I am missing some context here - what exactly does 'indexing' mean
here?
 
> Presumably others must be annoyed about having to manually "read" and
> archive all their sent mail, unless there's some other way that people
> having been dealing with this that I'm not aware of.

my import/tagging script deals with +sent on emails that I've sent and
removes -inbox -unread on them. The FCC logic gets them filed into a
Sent folder (right now just one - see previous comment about making this
>From address dependent)
 
> And as for drafts, they could be easily indexed and managed by the UI if
> the folder: search term is available.

Hmm - haven't even thought about drafts, yet. How would the UI deal with
those? 

/D

-- 
Dirk Hohndel
Intel Open Source Technology Center