From: David Bremner <david@tethera.net>
To: Tomi Ollila <tomi.ollila@iki.fi>, Jani Nikula <jani@nikula.org>,
	notmuch@notmuchmail.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] compact: provide user more information on
	after-compaction failures
In-Reply-To: <m28uwquccd.fsf@guru.guru-group.fi>
References: <1384362167-12740-1-git-send-email-tomi.ollila@iki.fi>
	<1384362167-12740-6-git-send-email-tomi.ollila@iki.fi>
	<871u2jnkai.fsf@nikula.org> <87y54rx8sf.fsf@unb.ca>
	<m28uwquccd.fsf@guru.guru-group.fi>
User-Agent: Notmuch/0.16+167~g9838fe8 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.3.1
	(x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2013 07:34:57 -0400
Message-ID: <8738mvz2fy.fsf@zancas.localnet>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: list

Tomi Ollila <tomi.ollila@iki.fi> writes:

> The log hook in it's current form is problematic as it doesn't provide
> way to distinguish progress reporting from error reporting.

Is this _more_ problematic than more output to stderr?

>  Currently
> lib/database.cc writes error messages with fprintf(stderr, ...) everywhere.

Sure. But I'm trying to understand why a partial fix isn't better than
nothing.  Is the argument just that the effort is wasted, or that the
result is somehow less satisfactory than the status quo.

> I suggest that this problem is fixed in one big sweep during 0.18
> development -- the suggestion Jani pastebin'd a few days ago is
> a good one and I'm willing to take part of that development...
> And now take this approach of fprintf()ing (basically I would
> also ask developers using the library wait for 0.18 before starting
> to use the compact functionality (if ever), as the we have yet
> another soname bump with changing interface coming...

I guess we can mark this interface as unstable for the moment?
"Asking developers not to use it" sounds pretty bad.

d