--- /dev/null
+Return-Path: <pieter@praet.org>\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 4D62E431FB6\r
+ for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Sat, 16 Apr 2011 08:27:16 -0700 (PDT)\r
+X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org\r
+X-Spam-Flag: NO\r
+X-Spam-Score: 0\r
+X-Spam-Level: \r
+X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[none]\r
+ 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 9PkHdmb5GC5Y for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;\r
+ Sat, 16 Apr 2011 08:27:12 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: from mail-wy0-f181.google.com (mail-wy0-f181.google.com\r
+ [74.125.82.181]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))\r
+ (No client certificate requested)\r
+ by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0C60C431FB5\r
+ for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Sat, 16 Apr 2011 08:27:11 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: by wyi11 with SMTP id 11so4049005wyi.26\r
+ for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Sat, 16 Apr 2011 08:27:09 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: by 10.216.24.92 with SMTP id w70mr731423wew.43.1302967626912;\r
+ Sat, 16 Apr 2011 08:27:06 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: from localhost (99.28-240-81.adsl-dyn.isp.belgacom.be\r
+ [81.240.28.99]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id\r
+ s40sm1778241weq.28.2011.04.16.08.27.03 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);\r
+ Sat, 16 Apr 2011 08:27:05 -0700 (PDT)\r
+From: Pieter Praet <pieter@praet.org>\r
+To: Jameson Rollins <jrollins@finestructure.net>,\r
+ notmuch <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>\r
+Subject: Re: signed/encrypted tagging in crypto branch\r
+In-Reply-To: <87bp1o83ij.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>\r
+References: <4CF15D67.1070904@fifthhorseman.net>\r
+ <87aak08fu8.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>\r
+ <87fwsf9mip.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>\r
+ <87tygl29vu.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>\r
+ <87oc5yi9us.fsf@zancas.localnet>\r
+ <87d3mdvjwz.fsf@bookbinder.fernseed.info>\r
+ <87k4gk70ng.fsf@SSpaeth.de>\r
+ <87sjv8i7v6.fsf@irigaray.ross.mayfirst.org>\r
+ <87sjv86mp9.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>\r
+ <4D6BF0AA.3070706@fifthhorseman.net>\r
+ <874o7o6ih5.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>\r
+ <4D6C00C7.9000705@fifthhorseman.net>\r
+ <8739n75zdb.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>\r
+ <87hbbno7ia.fsf@raven.defaultvalue.org>\r
+ <87pqqb4ium.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>\r
+ <878vwuvupl.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>\r
+ <87bp1o83ij.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>\r
+User-Agent: Notmuch/0.5-86-g4875299 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.1.50.1\r
+ (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)\r
+Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 17:27:02 +0200\r
+Message-ID:\r
+ <877haub4jd.fsf@A7GMS.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me>\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: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 15:27:16 -0000\r
+\r
+On Sun, 06 Mar 2011 11:15:00 -0800, Jameson Rollins <jrollins@finestructure.net> wrote:\r
+> On Sat, 05 Mar 2011 00:26:46 -0800, Jameson Rollins <jrollins@finestructure.net> wrote:\r
+> > Hey, folks. I just pushed a couple of patches to my "crypto" branch [0]\r
+> > that add support for auto-tagging of multipart/signed and\r
+> > multipart/encrypted messages with the "signed" and "encrypted" tags\r
+> > respectively. Only new messages are thus tagged, so a database rebuild\r
+> > is required to auto-tag old messages.\r
+> \r
+> So I realized last night, what now seems obvious, that restoring tags\r
+> after a notmuch new will override any initial auto tagging. This means\r
+> that doing a database rebuild will *not* crypto tag all your old mail if\r
+> you then restore tags from a tag dump afterwords.\r
+> \r
+> I'm not sure if there's anything that can be done about this. I think\r
+> we either have to have a way to merge tags, or the signed and encrypted\r
+> indicators need to exist in a different field in the database. Tags\r
+> allow more flexibility in the UIs, but maybe we could just tag based on\r
+> a the new database field somehow?\r
+> \r
+> It's not such a big deal that we only get "signed" and "encrypted" from\r
+> here forward, but it would be nice to re-tag old messages this way. I\r
+> can imagine that something like this will come up again in the future,\r
+> and it would be nice if we had a solution. I'm open to suggestions.\r
+> \r
+> jamie.\r
+Non-text part: application/pgp-signature\r
+> _______________________________________________\r
+> notmuch mailing list\r
+> notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+> http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch\r
+\r
+\r
+As long as we're talking solely about "signed" and "encrypted" (so no\r
+verification-wise information whatsoever), I'd definitely vote for a\r
+dedicated database field.\r
+\r
+It's absolutely immutable metadata, embedded in the message content.\r
+\r
+No point in using tags for that, though it's not mutually exclusive:\r
+"notmuch tag +signed -- is:signed" (or whatever, knock yourself out)\r
+\r
+If folders -which DO change, although rarely- got one, so should crypto.\r
+\r
+\r
+...but that's just my (insufficiently) humble opinion.\r
+\r
+\r
+Peace\r
+\r
+-Pieter\r
projects / notmuch-archives.git / commitdiff