Re: [RFC PATCH v5 00/11] Add NOTMUCH_MESSAGE_FLAG_EXCLUDED flag

diff --git a/01/2185902d06f665162c3ea95f4013aeb0dd3f08 b/01/2185902d06f665162c3ea95f4013aeb0dd3f08
new file mode 100644 (file)
index 0000000..ca7b880
--- /dev/null
+++ b/01/2185902d06f665162c3ea95f4013aeb0dd3f08
@@ -0,0 +1,95 @@
+Return-Path: <jrollins@finestructure.net>\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 B9C9D431E82\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Wed, 15 Feb 2012 10:10:27 -0800 (PST)\r
+X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org\r
+X-Spam-Flag: NO\r
+X-Spam-Score: -2.29\r
+X-Spam-Level: \r
+X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.29 tagged_above=-999 required=5\r
+       tests=[RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, T_MIME_NO_TEXT=0.01] autolearn=disabled\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 w8U5sWRPfvKA for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;\r
+       Wed, 15 Feb 2012 10:10:26 -0800 (PST)\r
+Received: from outgoing-mail.its.caltech.edu (outgoing-mail.its.caltech.edu\r
+       [131.215.239.19])\r
+       by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 136EC431E62\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Wed, 15 Feb 2012 10:10:26 -0800 (PST)\r
+Received: from earth-doxen.imss.caltech.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1])\r
+       by earth-doxen-postvirus (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FEE566E01AC;\r
+       Wed, 15 Feb 2012 10:10:25 -0800 (PST)\r
+X-Spam-Scanned: at Caltech-IMSS on earth-doxen by amavisd-new\r
+Received: from finestructure.net (DHCP-123-180.caltech.edu [131.215.123.180])\r
+       (Authenticated sender: jrollins)\r
+       by earth-doxen-submit (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9311F66E01E7;\r
+       Wed, 15 Feb 2012 10:10:18 -0800 (PST)\r
+Received: by finestructure.net (Postfix, from userid 1000)\r
+       id 17532436; Wed, 15 Feb 2012 10:10:17 -0800 (PST)\r
+From: Jameson Graef Rollins <jrollins@finestructure.net>\r
+To: Mark Walters <markwalters1009@gmail.com>, notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v5 00/11] Add NOTMUCH_MESSAGE_FLAG_EXCLUDED flag\r
+In-Reply-To: <8739acrnu7.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>\r
+References: <1329296619-7463-1-git-send-email-markwalters1009@gmail.com>\r
+       <8739acrnu7.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>\r
+User-Agent: Notmuch/0.11.1+192~g2bb5859 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.3.1\r
+       (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)\r
+Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2012 10:10:14 -0800\r
+Message-ID: <87zkckq86x.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>\r
+MIME-Version: 1.0\r
+Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";\r
+       micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"\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: Wed, 15 Feb 2012 18:10:28 -0000\r
+\r
+--=-=-=\r
+\r
+On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 09:46:56 -0800, Jameson Graef Rollins <jrollins@finestructure.net> wrote:\r
+> I missed some of the previous discussion on this, but rather than add a\r
+> new flag, why not just use the existing "match" flag?  If the message is\r
+> excluded, just mark "match" as "false".  I think this is basically all\r
+> we really want.  If the message is "excluded" include it in returned\r
+> threads, but just don't display it.  This is in fact exactly what the\r
+> "match" flag is currently for, and I can't see any reason not to use it\r
+> here.  We don't need to add anything new to the show output, and I\r
+> believe it will simplify this patch set considerably.\r
+\r
+Also, using the match flag means that all the consumers that use this\r
+will all automatically do the right thing, without modification.\r
+\r
+jamie.\r
+\r
+--=-=-=\r
+Content-Type: application/pgp-signature\r
+\r
+-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----\r
+Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)\r
+\r
+iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJPO/UGAAoJEO00zqvie6q8IfIP/j4rOQFHdXdvfzwXbhqEZxtM\r
+oYdHyNhBTn0s5o0G8gbOMo40guat0pM1dGLTXqAmIlRtO5oYQFMdrF02FBNp1+I8\r
++9yju+j67cccbHAKu/lHSyEFFqK3W4Ka9o2z3YrLxZnlICPh9aPHQunWb+caMGRA\r
+imA4oxmprctYRtoakhCE+vfTbCtvZ5IoZZUzJE12UWu/+d985lOu8TBAPGdtspR8\r
+W6AOhJjtoQ0yS9CMGTCCqZ+3iHZGNzWVrzW4742xtqqjr7gsOi+1qMAYifVHltSQ\r
+vDvwo7NgyAQ4/u8lFAv7KyQN4nDHSgdfvpzBRbm0zIHqNEijmill+JnL1Wbcitm7\r
+BleqXCVo9/Qxqlqh6WJAvEfxFCiYt5U7POC49ih8+WFAkWkNLGaOktz0L6o1w7Ej\r
+5Gw+VQe1pl14qbXKf/4aAuFCsk1BaEi9gHQrH1/BrYzQHrF6aDZmY8Q31kugHdsB\r
+4SjOcBfs0ViAM/h6SsHSoQy1tqAGy0+rShngYbINsPz4E0bFjcKx4tdH4iwuMnCK\r
+tC6coavFZxueSfCQ5gDR1wEw+UZFtQmtE1buozoqjMLxwf4ULECGqN68shaQTPxf\r
+gWJYHbQkDpDzeDBv3F4H3VNfd2qzCMPxzpjskhKjqk4Bzv1F6wqiUz3H6AHFoKGk\r
+8lF6a6iK3Vdos60o5SGx\r
+=Tkwu\r
+-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----\r
+--=-=-=--\r