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 1737D431FBD for ; Sat, 25 Jan 2014 11:30:10 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.7 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] 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 c7tJwPqavHrW for ; Sat, 25 Jan 2014 11:30:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ee0-f49.google.com (mail-ee0-f49.google.com [74.125.83.49]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B96A2431FBC for ; Sat, 25 Jan 2014 11:30:01 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ee0-f49.google.com with SMTP id d17so1537184eek.36 for ; Sat, 25 Jan 2014 11:29:59 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:references :user-agent:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type; bh=pPFraViFsUwwWOT6hCXpyq2Q9PaZrpwNTTnF6ygQT6Y=; b=WJx/8lwkOqY6PO5RLZiFlLWD553oD9P4SdgcjykE4HGgDUajF9UwtR51nj9+3Tqvdy uJhf4kyJvYVCJQ3C2qAc47v65C7JSfBgC4wYFNM3w1XdgEavhvzBNrXO1VT/z/TINua8 HWD6khefdsOGo/dxiPFc/ulGHwWpOwUSAq4LLu/1j1R4gefwW1M5bBxKtpIReizu+7z+ bJuFA+rF3Dgv6uVpHxGCBbP/BnWZ7rLk9fUiW2wKFUHQcNej4CWb6nFifNzTI/gn6tJ6 TNJS2YkiclCU582FWKCwmNcUE855YlZDNxQEtKY5gRVgKIQmwpv6XYyYihQ6I1AoCyE/ D7dA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkvBe/2vbySLFDycfm4USRlJNlX1R3Fdv5lRxSdWOF21BWlrCdLe37z958E/QD2hoZoxAhZ X-Received: by 10.15.33.193 with SMTP id c41mr7656578eev.79.1390678198047; Sat, 25 Jan 2014 11:29:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (dsl-hkibrasgw2-58c36f-91.dhcp.inet.fi. [88.195.111.91]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id o13sm19398898eex.19.2014.01.25.11.29.56 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 25 Jan 2014 11:29:57 -0800 (PST) From: Jani Nikula To: Mark Walters , notmuch@notmuchmail.org Subject: Re: automatic database upgrades (was: Re: [PATCH 0/7] cli: notmuch new improvements) In-Reply-To: <87fvoc9dd7.fsf@qmul.ac.uk> References: <87ppnga21o.fsf@qmul.ac.uk> <87lhy4f6pr.fsf@nikula.org> <87fvoc9dd7.fsf@qmul.ac.uk> User-Agent: Notmuch/0.17+44~ge3b4cd9 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.3.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2014 21:29:55 +0200 Message-ID: <87d2jfg8r0.fsf@nikula.org> 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: Sat, 25 Jan 2014 19:30:10 -0000 On Sat, 25 Jan 2014, Mark Walters wrote: > What about a config option? Something like > database_auto_upgrade=true/false? I wouldn't have a strong preference > which was the default (though I would choose "false" in my own > config). I guess we would need a command line --upgrade to allow people > with database_auto_upgrade=false to do force/allow the upgrade. I just recently read [1] again, I think it's a good one. It makes me ask the question, why should we ask the user to make that decision? The decision of what to do with the config option, or even whether to upgrade the database or not. Basically the decision is made when the user decides to upgrade notmuch. Once the user has upgraded notmuch his choices are to upgrade the database or downgrade notmuch. The user would probably just like to get on with the mail reading, which is probably also just means to an end! BR, Jani. [1] http://www.joelonsoftware.com/uibook/chapters/fog0000000059.html