--- /dev/null
+Return-Path: <racin@free.fr>\r
+X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])\r
+ by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6F8340DDED\r
+ for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Fri, 12 Nov 2010 08:23:27 -0800 (PST)\r
+X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org\r
+X-Spam-Flag: NO\r
+X-Spam-Score: -1.899\r
+X-Spam-Level: \r
+X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5\r
+ tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001]\r
+ autolearn=ham\r
+Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1])\r
+ by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)\r
+ with ESMTP id W9Bz-kohF0AO for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;\r
+ Fri, 12 Nov 2010 08:23:17 -0800 (PST)\r
+Received: from smtp3-g21.free.fr (smtp3-g21.free.fr [212.27.42.3])\r
+ by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83A0140DDD4\r
+ for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Fri, 12 Nov 2010 08:23:16 -0800 (PST)\r
+Received: from racin (unknown [82.239.207.166])\r
+ by smtp3-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51703A622A;\r
+ Fri, 12 Nov 2010 17:23:11 +0100 (CET)\r
+From: Matthieu Lemerre <racin@free.fr>\r
+To: Darren McGuicken <mailing-notmuch@fernseed.info>, notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Subject: Re: [PATCH] How to improve the mail handling workflow?\r
+In-Reply-To: <87sjz6ft52.fsf@bookbinder.fernseed.info>\r
+References: <87fwv65zw1.fsf@free.fr> <87sjz6ft52.fsf@bookbinder.fernseed.info>\r
+User-Agent: Notmuch/0.5 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.2.1\r
+ (i486-pc-linux-gnu)\r
+Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 17:35:22 +0100\r
+Message-ID: <87d3qa5wl1.fsf@free.fr>\r
+MIME-Version: 1.0\r
+Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii\r
+X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13\r
+Precedence: list\r
+List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system."\r
+ <notmuch.notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Unsubscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/options/notmuch>,\r
+ <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=unsubscribe>\r
+List-Archive: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch>\r
+List-Post: <mailto:notmuch@notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Help: <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=help>\r
+List-Subscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch>,\r
+ <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=subscribe>\r
+X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 16:23:28 -0000\r
+\r
+\r
+On Fri, 12 Nov 2010 15:39:37 +0000, Darren McGuicken <mailing-notmuch@fernseed.info> wrote:\r
+> On Fri, 12 Nov 2010 16:23:58 +0100, Matthieu Lemerre <racin@free.fr> wrote:\r
+> > Here is first a patch that copes with this last point. Whenever you\r
+> > want to archive a thread, it finds whether you forgot to add a custom\r
+> > "user" tag to a message, and if so asks you for a tag to add before\r
+> > archiving. That way, I no longer have messages without any tags.\r
+> \r
+> Hmm, this would be very irritating in my own workflow in which I really\r
+> only use a small number of tags on a fraction of my total mail archive\r
+> to differentiate mail type or content which can't otherwise be\r
+> determined from the indexed plain text of the message (I don't like to\r
+> add a 'notmuch' tag to mail from the list for instance since a saved\r
+> search for mail sent to the list address does exactly the same thing).\r
+\r
+I prefer to add tags, for the following reasons:\r
+\r
+ - If I want to search through a mailing list, I don't have to remember\r
+ its address. Saved searchs solve the problem only partly, because I\r
+ am not able to make complex queries involving several saved\r
+ searches. This could be solved only by making notmuch aware of saved\r
+ searches.\r
+\r
+ - I have some collection of emails that belong to a topic, even if the\r
+ topic does not appear in it. For instance, if I receive mails about a\r
+ project "foo", it can happen that foo is not mentionned in it.\r
+\r
+ - I think that adding more informations to mail help find it, even if\r
+ it fills my screen with tag names. Basically, I use tags for several\r
+ different things:\r
+ - to label information \r
+ - to indicate actions that have to be done (like todo, waiting, done, etc)\r
+ - the other are mail-related tags (inbox, attachment, replied etc).\r
+\r
+> I agree that the spacebar does too much if you're just using a search on\r
+> the inbox tag and want something to stay visible even when you've\r
+> quickly spacebar'd through a thread and archived it, but in my case that\r
+> was easily solved by creating a new default saved search called 'todo'\r
+> which collects unread, manually tagged 'todo' and mail matching a number\r
+> of other criteria into one place. When something has been followed-up\r
+> on, I remove the tag.\r
+\r
+But the space bar removes the unread tag, so I do not see how it\r
+helps... By default, hitting the space bar throughout a thread would\r
+remove every tag from the thread, so you keep asking "where was the mail\r
+in my inbox that I have read and I can't find anymore?"\r
+> \r
+> Colouring threads using notmuch-search-line-faces is also very useful in\r
+> that one-stop 'todo' view.\r
+> \r
+> Would any of that work for you? Why are plain text or header searches\r
+> not able to find the mail you're looking for?\r
+\r
+Of course, I can change my patch so that its behaviour can be customized\r
+using a variable.\r
+\r
+Thanks,\r
+Matthieu\r
projects / notmuch-archives.git / commitdiff