From: Jani Nikula Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2014 11:06:25 +0000 (+0200) Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] lib: make folder: prefix literal X-Git-Url: http://git.tremily.us/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=6ca06fa104fde7f6388b46a5b58141327c8fd8bb;p=notmuch-archives.git Re: [PATCH 0/5] lib: make folder: prefix literal --- diff --git a/e2/3880a31b39acb8fb05e9cd981dc967a5e7d273 b/e2/3880a31b39acb8fb05e9cd981dc967a5e7d273 new file mode 100644 index 000000000..d061a566b --- /dev/null +++ b/e2/3880a31b39acb8fb05e9cd981dc967a5e7d273 @@ -0,0 +1,105 @@ +Return-Path: +X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E075431FBD + for ; Sat, 25 Jan 2014 03:06:35 -0800 (PST) +X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org +X-Spam-Flag: NO +X-Spam-Score: -0.7 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 + tests=[RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=disabled +Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1]) + by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) + with ESMTP id ho9bmCHAYeYw for ; + Sat, 25 Jan 2014 03:06:30 -0800 (PST) +Received: from mail-ee0-f42.google.com (mail-ee0-f42.google.com + [74.125.83.42]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client + certificate requested) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id + E3C67431FBC for ; Sat, 25 Jan 2014 03:06:29 -0800 + (PST) +Received: by mail-ee0-f42.google.com with SMTP id e49so1392670eek.29 + for ; Sat, 25 Jan 2014 03:06:27 -0800 (PST) +X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; + d=1e100.net; s=20130820; + h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:references + :user-agent:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type; + bh=xe5ZjDv+sUFubCOxoNmTsD0FNnEqtIMCDal5rGtuMSA=; + b=YkuzUum/coVuAl2RwESl2aKj4DVnpP7WONMqXBlDK/7qKB8fNlr+zmWggBRgqfp7gX + rXWCZsF6wOUIrFIb0EMxvJedGn7d5QKfaDS8ek+jux2OI4mryLSpxxLCecCz9SUj95fo + fpKLwdO/j1RKvTEbxO+L7p72rLw0jykdg/U6s89Xfw3xaa/QMbg/vmyT87bNImCeL+rr + ScWK6mPEvwZE8U5VzfPp5qapPb35X3EgqwllHCXsj+cIwyqVZl9+XXDq9D/VubdIwtNR + 7AWactvNdrGFvENLqXaOYMU1+U7L1Hbdw0SnBKprzg1Dr8bPxzqDyCz5L6Vr/PjhB+sQ + PWXg== +X-Gm-Message-State: + ALoCoQnr9n45eiNMebLVNrSgNDu0mQtxiTeIwKJAObaCfOt1k3Vf0yAZZKSHN4rXYlSkD69Odr2p +X-Received: by 10.14.0.201 with SMTP id 49mr17098412eeb.38.1390647987476; + Sat, 25 Jan 2014 03:06:27 -0800 (PST) +Received: from localhost (dsl-hkibrasgw2-58c36f-91.dhcp.inet.fi. + [88.195.111.91]) + by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id 46sm14726160ees.4.2014.01.25.03.06.26 + for + (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); + Sat, 25 Jan 2014 03:06:26 -0800 (PST) +From: Jani Nikula +To: Tomi Ollila , + Austin Clements , notmuch@notmuchmail.org +Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] lib: make folder: prefix literal +In-Reply-To: +References: + <87y525m649.fsf@awakening.csail.mit.edu> + <87r47wfltb.fsf@nikula.org> +User-Agent: Notmuch/0.17+44~ge3b4cd9 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.3.1 + (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) +Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2014 13:06:25 +0200 +Message-ID: <87ob30fhhq.fsf@nikula.org> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain +X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 +Precedence: list +List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." + +List-Unsubscribe: , + +List-Archive: +List-Post: +List-Help: +List-Subscribe: , + +X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2014 11:06:35 -0000 + +On Sat, 25 Jan 2014, Tomi Ollila wrote: +> On Sat, Jan 25 2014, Jani Nikula wrote: +>> Perhaps we need to have two prefixes, one of which is the literal +>> filesystem folder and another which hides the implementation details, +>> like I mentioned in my mail to Peter [1]. But consider this: my proposed +>> implementation does cover *all* use cases. +> +> I challenge that with my use case: my mails are arranged as follows: + +[snip] + +> For me the current folder: works as I don't have collisions. + +Fair enough, your use case would be *very inconvenient* with the +proposed changes to the folder: prefix, *regardless* of whether the leaf +cur/new is indexed and required or not. + +(Very inconvenient, or practically impossible, as you'd have to include +all those 01..ff directories in your searches.) + +> For me a folder: search which would just work as a prefix i.e. match +> anything under given directory hierarchy would work best. + +Indeed. Your use case is not an argument in whether cur/new should be +included or not. + +That "recursive folder prefix" suggestion is, I think, incompatible with +the requirements for the literal folder: prefix we've been considering. + + +BR, +Jani. +