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 95486431FB6 for ; Thu, 25 Sep 2014 01:13:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[none] 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 1YoV2XTjO6ln for ; Thu, 25 Sep 2014 01:13:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from yantan.tethera.net (yantan.tethera.net [199.188.72.155]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F1770431FAF for ; Thu, 25 Sep 2014 01:13:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from remotemail by yantan.tethera.net with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XX4BN-0004aZ-Q2; Thu, 25 Sep 2014 05:13:45 -0300 Received: (nullmailer pid 27379 invoked by uid 1000); Thu, 25 Sep 2014 08:13:40 -0000 From: David Bremner To: Jani Nikula , notmuch@notmuchmail.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/11] notmuch insert updates In-Reply-To: References: User-Agent: Notmuch/0.18.1+98~gae27403 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.3.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2014 10:13:40 +0200 Message-ID: <878ul815jf.fsf@maritornes.cs.unb.ca> 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: Thu, 25 Sep 2014 08:13:55 -0000 Jani Nikula writes: > This series refactors and cleans up insert, improves error handling and > reporting, and adds post-insert hook. I intend to add documentation and > more tests, but the code is ready for review. Also, at least some of the > cleanups and fixes in the beginning of the series could go in without > additional tests or documentation. The first 4 seem trivial, and I marked them so. 5-8 don't introduce new functionality, and don't break any existing tests. Subject to a little more review, these could probably be merged now. 5 is almost trivial; it wouldn't hurt to explicitly document the return values of sync_dir, while touching this code. 6 and 8 seem ok, but should probably have another pair of eyes. 7 seems ok. At first I worried about the usual issue of races between name definition and open, but it seems like nothing changes here.