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 F2F4C418C37 for ; Wed, 21 Apr 2010 16:09:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.89 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.89 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[ALL_TRUSTED=-1, BAYES_00=-1.9, T_MIME_NO_TEXT=0.01] autolearn=ham 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 QSCXxS7vOuH7; Wed, 21 Apr 2010 16:09:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from yoom.home.cworth.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 470C5431FC1; Wed, 21 Apr 2010 16:09:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by yoom.home.cworth.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id EB7D2568DE4; Wed, 21 Apr 2010 16:09:52 -0700 (PDT) From: Carl Worth To: Sebastian Spaeth , Olly Betts , notmuch@notmuchmail.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] allow to not sort the search results In-Reply-To: <87wrw4sw2d.fsf@SSpaeth.de> References: <1271226655-5672-1-git-send-email-Sebastian@SSpaeth.de> <20100414065525.GA11770@jdc.jasonjgw.net> <87hbnebhg0.fsf@SSpaeth.de> <87eiifj433.fsf@SSpaeth.de> <87wrw4sw2d.fsf@SSpaeth.de> Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 16:09:52 -0700 Message-ID: <87d3xsjtbz.fsf@yoom.home.cworth.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" 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, 21 Apr 2010 23:09:54 -0000 --=-=-= Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 15:56:58 +0200, "Sebastian Spaeth" wrote: > > The patches do: > > 1: Introduce NOTMUCH_SORT_UNSORTED > > 2: Introduce notmuch search --sort=3Dunsorted > > 3: Make notmuch tag not sort results by date > >=20 > > #2 is the one I am least sure about, I don't know if there is a use case > > for notmuch search returning unsorted results. But 1 & 3 are useful at > > least. ... > May I advocate patches 1 & 3 for inclusion in 0.3? I've been using this > in my tree without problems. patch 2 is left to your judgement as to > whether a "--sort=3Dunsorted" is useful for notmuch search. (it will > probably rather benefit from a --sort=3Drelevance, I guess). Done. I've pushed out 1 & 3 now. I can't find any use case where =2D-sort=3Dunsorted is interesting for "notmuch search". If people want to start playing with --sort=3Drelevance then that could be very interesting. (For me, and for almost all email searches I do, I almost always want date-based sorting. But if I start having trouble finding things with particular queries, I might want to play with the relevance-based stuff.) =2DCarl --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFLz4XA6JDdNq8qSWgRAh2lAJ0Qu7lsHv8mdb+g1V87nCdeFjTaCwCfedo9 76xqBMNLFNjq53Gn4tjUajc= =Od6M -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--