--- /dev/null
+Return-Path: <m.walters@qmul.ac.uk>\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 3F746431FAE\r
+ for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Fri, 21 Nov 2014 07:10:35 -0800 (PST)\r
+X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org\r
+X-Spam-Flag: NO\r
+X-Spam-Score: -1.098\r
+X-Spam-Level: \r
+X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5\r
+ tests=[DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001,\r
+ NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=1.2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] 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 cULzEf8tPVJo for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;\r
+ Fri, 21 Nov 2014 07:10:31 -0800 (PST)\r
+Received: from mail2.qmul.ac.uk (mail2.qmul.ac.uk [138.37.6.6])\r
+ (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))\r
+ (No client certificate requested)\r
+ by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D97F9431FB6\r
+ for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Fri, 21 Nov 2014 07:10:30 -0800 (PST)\r
+Received: from smtp.qmul.ac.uk ([138.37.6.40])\r
+ by mail2.qmul.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.71)\r
+ (envelope-from <m.walters@qmul.ac.uk>)\r
+ id 1Xrpqm-0005N7-5G; Fri, 21 Nov 2014 15:10:24 +0000\r
+Received: from sc-4173-rec-r1.memphis.edu ([141.225.189.252] helo=localhost)\r
+ by smtp.qmul.ac.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.71)\r
+ (envelope-from <m.walters@qmul.ac.uk>)\r
+ id 1XrpqP-0006C5-Or; Fri, 21 Nov 2014 15:10:19 +0000\r
+From: Mark Walters <markwalters1009@gmail.com>\r
+To: Olivier Berger <olivier.berger@telecom-sudparis.eu>,\r
+ David Bremner <david@tethera.net>\r
+Subject: Re: tag:deleted messages immediately deleted ?\r
+In-Reply-To: <87d28gd703.fsf@inf-11879.int-evry.fr>\r
+References: <877fyseuq8.fsf@inf-11879.int-evry.fr>\r
+ <87d28ku7rt.fsf@maritornes.cs.unb.ca>\r
+ <871tp0ek8b.fsf@inf-11879.int-evry.fr>\r
+ <87lhn8fmq9.fsf@maritornes.cs.unb.ca>\r
+ <877fypre49.fsf@inf-11879.int-evry.fr>\r
+ <87r3wx9eaq.fsf@maritornes.cs.unb.ca>\r
+ <87d28gd703.fsf@inf-11879.int-evry.fr>\r
+User-Agent: Notmuch/0.18.1+86~gef5e66a (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.4.1\r
+ (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)\r
+Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2014 15:08:59 +0000\r
+Message-ID: <87zjbkwpys.fsf@qmul.ac.uk>\r
+MIME-Version: 1.0\r
+Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii\r
+X-Sender-Host-Address: 141.225.189.252\r
+X-QM-Geographic: According to ripencc,\r
+ this message was delivered by a machine in Britain (UK) (GB).\r
+X-QM-SPAM-Info: Sender has good ham record. :)\r
+X-QM-Body-MD5: 1c2cbafe1c8c90cf7817093762570a94 (of first 20000 bytes)\r
+X-SpamAssassin-Score: -0.0\r
+X-SpamAssassin-SpamBar: /\r
+X-SpamAssassin-Report: The QM spam filters have analysed this message to\r
+ determine if it is\r
+ spam. We require at least 5.0 points to mark a message as spam.\r
+ This message scored -0.0 points.\r
+ Summary of the scoring: \r
+ * 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail\r
+ provider * (markwalters1009[at]gmail.com)\r
+ * -0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay\r
+ * domain\r
+X-QM-Scan-Virus: ClamAV says the message is clean\r
+Cc: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\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, 21 Nov 2014 15:10:35 -0000\r
+\r
+On Fri, 21 Nov 2014, Olivier Berger <olivier.berger@telecom-sudparis.eu> wrote:\r
+> David Bremner <david@tethera.net> writes:\r
+>\r
+>> Olivier Berger <olivier.berger@telecom-sudparis.eu> writes:\r
+>>\r
+>>>\r
+>>> So, I've tried and removed the spam tag from the exclude_tags, and\r
+>>> suddenly, the search in emacs responds with the 981... which means that\r
+>>> most of the deleted ones had the spam tag too.\r
+>>>\r
+>>>\r
+>>> So it means that if one explicitely requests an excluded tag, other\r
+>>> exclude tags still apply. Not sure this is the desirable option : maybe\r
+>>> if one exclusion is waved, then others should too ?\r
+>>>\r
+>>> What do you think ?\r
+>>\r
+>> I'm not sure. What you suggest sounds sensible enough. On the other hand\r
+>> the way it behaves now is precisely as documented; I'm not sure whether\r
+>> this is because of a design choice or ease of implementation. Maybe Mark\r
+>> can comment further on that. I guess there are even people who\r
+>> like/rely on the current functionality, since there always are ;).\r
+\r
+This was definitely a design choice (I think probably by Austin/jrollins) and I\r
+think it makes sense: why would you want to include one include spam\r
+messages when you are searching for deleted messages?\r
+\r
+A change would break my setup - not in itself a problem as I setup this\r
+way to make sure I exercised the exclude code. I tag all my notmuch\r
+mailing list mail tag:notmuch and have that as an excluded tag. Then\r
+mailing list results do not clutter up results when I am doing personal\r
+searches.\r
+\r
+>>\r
+>\r
+> In any case, there has been a change in the way this worked.\r
+\r
+I don't think anyone has touched this code for over two years: git blame\r
+seems to suggest March 2012.\r
+\r
+> For the moment, I'm using the following saved search :\r
+> (tag:deleted or tag:spam) and tag:deleted\r
+> which will display the deleted mails.\r
+\r
+I do think it would be nice to have a clear way of turning excludes off\r
+in the emacs frontend. Without a query parser it's not clear what the\r
+best way to do it is: I suggested a hack which allowed --exclude=false\r
+to be passed as part of the search. We could add a toggle to rerun a\r
+search with exclude=false but that doesn't help much for saved searches\r
+or manually entered searches.\r
+\r
+Best wishes\r
+\r
+Mark\r
+\r
projects / notmuch-archives.git / commitdiff