From: dm-list-email-notmuch Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2015 19:34:30 +0000 (+1700) Subject: Re: Enabling and disabling maildir.synchronize_flags X-Git-Url: http://git.tremily.us/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=f2de83ba2fd492bcac87ac0489b63d34135f20f3;p=notmuch-archives.git Re: Enabling and disabling maildir.synchronize_flags --- diff --git a/76/4996eb0dfd1a782a4e0db4c500b42a3ff07914 b/76/4996eb0dfd1a782a4e0db4c500b42a3ff07914 new file mode 100644 index 000000000..078e2a933 --- /dev/null +++ b/76/4996eb0dfd1a782a4e0db4c500b42a3ff07914 @@ -0,0 +1,101 @@ +Return-Path: + +X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3ECE6DE0B26 + for ; Sun, 16 Aug 2015 12:41:14 -0700 (PDT) +X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at cworth.org +X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER SECTION, Duplicate header field: "References" +X-Spam-Flag: NO +X-Spam-Score: -1.798 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.798 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.309, + RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.55, SPF_PASS=-0.001, + URIBL_SBL=0.644, URIBL_SBL_A=0.1] autolearn=disabled +Received: from arlo.cworth.org ([127.0.0.1]) + by localhost (arlo.cworth.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) + with ESMTP id Hva2JRWxVmst for ; + Sun, 16 Aug 2015 12:41:13 -0700 (PDT) +Received: from market.scs.stanford.edu (market.scs.stanford.edu [171.66.3.10]) + by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2713A6DE01D3 + for ; Sun, 16 Aug 2015 12:41:13 -0700 (PDT) +Received: from market.scs.stanford.edu (localhost.scs.stanford.edu + [127.0.0.1]) by market.scs.stanford.edu (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id + t7GJfCSm001264 for ; Sun, 16 Aug 2015 12:41:12 -0700 + (PDT) +Received: (from dm@localhost) + by market.scs.stanford.edu (8.14.7/8.14.7/Submit) id t7GJfCXX012637; + Sun, 16 Aug 2015 12:41:12 -0700 (PDT) +X-Authentication-Warning: market.scs.stanford.edu: dm set sender to + return-m5bnw98qfab3x8rrwucsc97r9e@ta.scs.stanford.edu using -f +From: dm-list-email-notmuch@scs.stanford.edu +To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +Subject: Re: Enabling and disabling maildir.synchronize_flags +In-Reply-To: <87614ffl0t.fsf@maritornes.cs.unb.ca> +Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2015 12:34:30 -0700 +References: <87r3orbqfn.fsf@ta.scs.stanford.edu> + <87r3n3fu7d.fsf@maritornes.cs.unb.ca> <874mjzblwc.fsf@ta.scs.stanford.edu> + <87614ffl0t.fsf@maritornes.cs.unb.ca> <87vbcf9ge1.fsf@ta.scs.stanford.edu> +References: <87r3orbqfn.fsf@ta.scs.stanford.edu> + <87r3n3fu7d.fsf@maritornes.cs.unb.ca> <874mjzblwc.fsf@ta.scs.stanford.edu> + <87614ffl0t.fsf@maritornes.cs.unb.ca> +Message-ID: <87pp2n9g2v.fsf@ta.scs.stanford.edu> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain +X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 +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: Sun, 16 Aug 2015 19:41:15 -0000 + +David Bremner writes: + +> David Mazieres writes: +>> So my question remains, what's the easiest safe way to re-enable +[ 2 more citation lines. Click/Enter to show. ] +>> synchronize_flags after disabling it? (Safe meaning it won't change any +>> tags.) It could be that there's a very simple answer, in which case +>> sticking it in the man page might be nice. +> +> I can't think of a simple, safe, and fast answer. + +Okay, thanks. At least I wasn't missing something obvious. + +> 2) when the lastmod changes go in, it seems like you could run the first +> notmuch new after enabling tag synchonizing, and dump only the tag +> changes since a checkpoint lastmod value. This would allow rolling +> back the unwanted tag changes. + +Indeed, one of many reasons I'm eagerly awaiting lastmod changes. + +> [1]: see this potential test, if for some reason we wanted to +> guarantee this behaviours. + +If we did want this, I'm assuming it would take the form of a new option +to notmuch new (--override-flags) which says to do the synchronization +in the other direction (Xapian -> Maildir)? There would be benefit to +having such a flag, but I don't know how hard it would be to implement, +so I can't do the cost/benefit analysis. + +As a kind of aside, one reason people might want to synchronize flags is +for mobile device support. I don't regularly access my email from my +mobile phone, but on those rare occasions when I might need to, I set up +an IMAP server and use an imap client on the phone. I wonder if anyone +has thought about implementing an IMAP-ish server directly on top of +libnotmuch. (I say IMAP-ish because the obvious SEARCH command +implementation wouldn't be RFC3501-compliant, but who cares when notmuch +has something better.) + +Does anyone else use both notmuch but also access email from a mobile +device? If so what do you do? + +David