From: Rob Browning <rlb@defaultvalue.org>
To: Austin Clements <amdragon@MIT.EDU>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] lib: make folder: prefix literal
References: <cover.1389304779.git.jani@nikula.org>
	<87y525m649.fsf@awakening.csail.mit.edu> <87r47wfltb.fsf@nikula.org>
	<87iot8f4vg.fsf@nikula.org> <20140130220234.GI4375@mit.edu>
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2014 13:19:47 -0600
In-Reply-To: <20140130220234.GI4375@mit.edu> (Austin Clements's message of
	"Thu, 30 Jan 2014 17:02:34 -0500")
Message-ID: <871tzovu0c.fsf@trouble.defaultvalue.org>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Cc: notmuch@notmuchmail.org
Precedence: list

Austin Clements <amdragon@MIT.EDU> writes:

> folder: could work the way I suggested (simply the path to the file,
> with {cur,new} stripped off).

Hmm, so would notmuch try to guess whether or not it's dealing with a
maildir++ tree, and if so convert folder:foo to a search of .foo, and/or
folder:foo/bar to .foo.bar?  Or would the user just need to know to say
folder:.foo and folder:.foo.bar?

And if we're only planning special treatment for for maildir-like
stores, then I wonder if the term should just be maildir:?

Though folder: would make more sense if the long-term goal was to have a
"DTRT" term.  But in that case, I wonder if it might eventually be
expected to support mixed trees, i.e. say a tree containing maildir++
and mh subdirs, and if so, how that should be handled.

> many shells support "**" for recursive path matching and people are
> already quite familiar with glob patterns for paths, so why not simply
> adopt this?

rsync too.

-- 
Rob Browning
rlb @defaultvalue.org and @debian.org
GPG as of 2011-07-10 E6A9 DA3C C9FD 1FF8 C676 D2C4 C0F0 39E9 ED1B 597A
GPG as of 2002-11-03 14DD 432F AE39 534D B592 F9A0 25C8 D377 8C7E 73A4