DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=maillard.im; h=from:to:cc
	:subject:in-reply-to:references:reply-to:date:message-id
	:mime-version:content-type; q=dns; s=postfix; b=eCixXG5wEeNPL1Bq
	PFoGffChOWxcZBAXmrOBAUOQTc7xhquj38T/QbJYUi6agk8GRdivGRh5HAIE5BPg
	aUxhTGJCVFkZARMoKLbaBllNjHB9ifhg1G6qg5gKto75FGdWsPQFfMj4Y4cBi9BC
	a0PfGSa7q6zts76ioMMq+8nPKcw=
From: Xavier Maillard <xavier@maillard.im>
To: Pieter Praet <pieter@praet.org>, Austin Clements <amdragon@MIT.EDU>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] search: Support automatic tag exclusions
In-Reply-To: <1327000744-25463-1-git-send-email-pieter@praet.org>
References: <1326586654-16840-3-git-send-email-amdragon@mit.edu>
	<1327000744-25463-1-git-send-email-pieter@praet.org>
User-Agent: Notmuch/0.11 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.2.1
	(i486-slackware-linux-gnu)
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2012 23:09:30 +0100
Message-ID: <m2ty3n2xut.fsf@kcals.intra.maillard.im>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: Notmuch Mail <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Xavier Maillard <xma@gnu.org>

Hey Pieter,

On Thu, 19 Jan 2012 20:19:00 +0100, Pieter Praet <pieter@praet.org> wrote:
> Nice feature!  I won't be using it myself, but I can imagine it being
> *very* useful for those who still feel the need to "delete" email :).

Adding a 'deleted' tag does not mean there will be a delete/purge
process ;) (currently I got 5k messages with the tag deleted ;). 

> Nitpicking:
> 

[ ... ]

>   So I'd like to suggest replacing all occurences of "auto_exclude_tags"
>   with "search_exclude_tags" (and simply "exclude_tags" in the args to
>   `_config_get_list' and `_config_set_list', of course).

+1
 
>   Unfortunately, this would also partially invalidate your recent NEWS
>   submission [2].
> 
> - If the 'search.exclude_tags' option is missing from the config file,
>   its value is automatically set to "deleted;spam;", which probably isn't
>   a sane default.  Luckily, you've already provided the solution [3].

I am against doing something /unsafe/ in the user's back. If there is no
option set intentionnaly by the user, there is nothing notmuch should
do -i.e no exclusion -

> - To make new users aware of the config option's existence, we should
>   prompt them to configure it during setup.

+1

/Xavier