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 56FE5431FBD; Fri, 4 Dec 2009 10:35:29 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org 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 CiA3CvKM9Y3e; Fri, 4 Dec 2009 10:35:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from yoom.home.cworth.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96E62431FAE; Fri, 4 Dec 2009 10:35:28 -0800 (PST) Received: by yoom.home.cworth.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 5197C2542FB; Fri, 4 Dec 2009 10:35:28 -0800 (PST) From: Carl Worth To: Mikhail Gusarov , notmuch@notmuchmail.org In-Reply-To: <87aaxysjdj.fsf@vertex.dottedmag> References: <1259267025-28733-1-git-send-email-dottedmag@dottedmag.net> <1259788526-14205-1-git-send-email-dottedmag@dottedmag.net> <87zl5zfty5.fsf@yoom.home.cworth.org> <87k4x29732.wl%bremner@pivot.cs.unb.ca> <87bpiefwdq.fsf@yoom.home.cworth.org> <87aaxysjdj.fsf@vertex.dottedmag> Date: Fri, 04 Dec 2009 10:35:27 -0800 Message-ID: <87aaxyfuz4.fsf@yoom.home.cworth.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Subject: Re: [notmuch] [PATCH (rebased)] Handle message renames in mail spool X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 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: Fri, 04 Dec 2009 18:35:29 -0000 --=-=-= On Sat, 05 Dec 2009 00:07:36 +0600, Mikhail Gusarov wrote: > The only problem with Cc is that Mailman suppresses duplicate messages and hence > there is no List-Id: on message. Hey, well notmuch doesn't even index the List-Id: header anyway. [*] ;-) But the above sounds like the List-Id header is unreliable enough to be useless. Any reason not to just use something like to:notmuch@notmuchmail to match messages sent to a list like this one? I think mailman defaults to not allowing messages with the mailing-list address implicit (such as in a Bcc) so it seems like matching the list recipient will be more reliable than hoping the List-Id is always there. -Carl [*] Our TODO list does talk about supporting a configuration parameter for indexing additional headers of interest. --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFLGVZw6JDdNq8qSWgRAq/PAJ0Xmbxt8ULKVwMr//QecvKdQffo/gCfbMj4 odvkm0sTIClM/pndSCFco/w= =9gGX -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--