From 4d10aebb8e403223edb2b64505b9d2f484cde405 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Michal Sojka Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2014 13:23:52 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Re: [PATCH v2 06/10] cli: Introduce "notmuch address" command --- d0/b0ea471c34fa8f749e495fdd16164477bf6fc7 | 111 ++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 111 insertions(+) create mode 100644 d0/b0ea471c34fa8f749e495fdd16164477bf6fc7 diff --git a/d0/b0ea471c34fa8f749e495fdd16164477bf6fc7 b/d0/b0ea471c34fa8f749e495fdd16164477bf6fc7 new file mode 100644 index 000000000..d034a1f5f --- /dev/null +++ b/d0/b0ea471c34fa8f749e495fdd16164477bf6fc7 @@ -0,0 +1,111 @@ +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 13897431FAF + for ; Wed, 5 Nov 2014 04:24:11 -0800 (PST) +X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org +X-Spam-Flag: NO +X-Spam-Score: -2.3 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 tagged_above=-999 required=5 + tests=[RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] 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 7FiyazWQSo4D for ; + Wed, 5 Nov 2014 04:24:03 -0800 (PST) +Received: from max.feld.cvut.cz (max.feld.cvut.cz [147.32.192.36]) + by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92586431FAE + for ; Wed, 5 Nov 2014 04:24:03 -0800 (PST) +Received: from localhost (unknown [192.168.200.7]) + by max.feld.cvut.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 449FB5CD26F; + Wed, 5 Nov 2014 13:23:59 +0100 (CET) +X-Virus-Scanned: IMAP STYX AMAVIS +Received: from max.feld.cvut.cz ([192.168.200.1]) + by localhost (styx.feld.cvut.cz [192.168.200.7]) (amavisd-new, + port 10044) + with ESMTP id d01Jy_ID88Tj; Wed, 5 Nov 2014 13:23:54 +0100 (CET) +Received: from imap.feld.cvut.cz (imap.feld.cvut.cz [147.32.192.34]) + by max.feld.cvut.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 196515CD26A; + Wed, 5 Nov 2014 13:23:53 +0100 (CET) +Received: from wsh by steelpick.2x.cz with local (Exim 4.84) + (envelope-from ) + id 1Xlzcu-000669-T2; Wed, 05 Nov 2014 13:23:52 +0100 +From: Michal Sojka +To: Mark Walters , notmuch@notmuchmail.org +Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/10] cli: Introduce "notmuch address" command +In-Reply-To: <87d291ao34.fsf@qmul.ac.uk> +References: <1415058622-21162-1-git-send-email-sojkam1@fel.cvut.cz> + <1415058622-21162-7-git-send-email-sojkam1@fel.cvut.cz> + <87zjc72v79.fsf@qmul.ac.uk> <87y4rqliid.fsf@steelpick.2x.cz> + <87d291ao34.fsf@qmul.ac.uk> +User-Agent: Notmuch/0.18.2+178~g6e9e8bb (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.3.1 + (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) +Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2014 13:23:52 +0100 +Message-ID: <87y4rpkf8n.fsf@steelpick.2x.cz> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +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: Wed, 05 Nov 2014 12:24:11 -0000 + +On Wed, Nov 05 2014, Mark Walters wrote: +> On Tue, 04 Nov 2014, Michal Sojka wrote: +>> On Tue, Nov 04 2014, Mark Walters wrote: +>>> On Mon, 03 Nov 2014, Michal Sojka wrote: +>>>> This moves address-related functionality from search command to the +>>>> new address command. The implementation shares almost all code and +>>>> some command line options. +>>>> +>>>> Options --offset and --limit were intentionally not included in the +>>>> address command, because they refer to messages numbers, which users +>>>> do not see in the output. This could confuse users because, for +>>>> example, they could see more addresses in the output that what was +>>>> specified with --limit. This functionality can be correctly +>>>> reimplemented for addresses later. +>>> +>>> I am not sure about this: we already have this anomaly for output=3Dfil= +es +>>> say. Also I can imagine calling notmuch address --limit=3D1000 ... to g= +et +>>> a bunch of recent addresses quickly and I really am wanting to look at +>>> 1000 messages, not collect 1000 addresses. +>> +>> I think that one of the reasons for having the new "address" command is +>> to have cleaner user interface. And including "anomalies" doesn't sound +>> like a way to achieve this. I think that now you can use "date:" query +>> to limit the search. +>> +>> I volunteer to implement "address --limit" properly after 0.19. This +>> should be easy. +> +> I think this depends on how you view limit: is it to limit the output +> (roughly to run "head" on the output), or is to bound the amount of work +> notmuch has to do (eg to make sure you don't get a long delay). Your +> suggestion is definitely the former, whereas I am more worried about the +> latter: limit in your definition could take an essentially unbounded +> amount of time. + +Why? If I understand you correctly, you think of limit in terms of +messages. There is 1:N mapping between messages and addresses, where +N=C2=A0>=3D=C2=A01. If I limit the number of printed addresses, I limit the= + number +of messages as well. Only if N is zero (which probably can be the case +with Bcc and --output=3Drecipients) then it can result in unbounded work +(provided you have infinite number of Bcc only messages in your +database=C2=A0:-)). + +Do I miss something? + +-Michal -- 2.26.2