From: Michal Sojka <sojkam1@fel.cvut.cz>
To: Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net>,
	notmuch <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>
Subject: Re: splittng threads [was: Re: Combining threads]
In-Reply-To: <4CDDF5F3.9040800@fifthhorseman.net>
References: <AANLkTimDjk_-Xjpf6uovGXgyG_3j-ySLWQR+0UvdVjjT@mail.gmail.com>
	<87mxpe81t9.fsf@yoom.home.cworth.org>
	<4CDDF5F3.9040800@fifthhorseman.net>
User-Agent: Notmuch/0.5-11-g48b5e00 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.2.1
	(x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2010 23:24:09 +0100
Message-ID: <87bp5rr1bq.fsf@steelpick.2x.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Precedence: list

On Sat, 13 Nov 2010, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> (hi list -- i'm new here; don't be afraid to explain things to me that
> seem obvious to you, or correct my vocabulary if i'm using it wrong)
> 
> On 11/12/2010 08:11 PM, Carl Worth wrote:
> > But I suppose it's as simple a matter of creating a new "top-level
> > message" term in the database. The split operation would set this
> > term. The explicit join operation would clear it, and the implicit join
> > operation would have to be made to respect it by avoiding merging any
> > top-level messages as a child of some other message. I haven't thought
> > through exactly how that would work in the implementation, but hopefully
> > it wouldn't be too hard.
> 
> my current understanding is that a not-uncommon use case is to have two
> separate notmuch instances, synchronized by syncing maildirs and
> tagsets.  Would such a thread-split be syncable between two notmuch
> instances?

It won't be syncable without a special support somewhere in notmuch.

-Michal