From: David Bremner <david@tethera.net>
To: "W. Trevor King" <wking@tremily.us>
Cc: notmuch@notmuchmail.org
Subject: Re: nmbug in the Debian packages?
In-Reply-To: <20160213220250.GB4265@odin.tremily.us>
References: <cun37t5r91p.fsf@disaster-area.hh.sledj.net>
 <87twlj8mix.fsf@maritornes.cs.unb.ca> <20160208193804.GE4265@odin.tremily.us>
 <87lh6o79vb.fsf@zancas.localnet> <20160213220250.GB4265@odin.tremily.us>
User-Agent: Notmuch/0.21+26~g9404723 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.5.1
 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 09:16:00 -0400
Message-ID: <87h9h8vlrj.fsf@zancas.localnet>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: list

"W. Trevor King" <wking@tremily.us> writes:

>
> I'd floated notmuch-dtag earlier [1].  Does that sound right?  Or do
> folks prefer another name?
>

I had a thought about this. The password manager "pass" uses

   pass git {push|pull}

for git related operations. Perhaps that would make sense for us as
well? So initially "notmuch-git".  I'm of course open to better ideas,
but especially since you pushed a bit to make the interface follow git
more closely, perhaps that's a more informative name than "dtag".  It
also leaves open the possibility of stashing other metadata than tags,
should something like [1] come to pass.

On the other hand, it's true that what we're doing is less transparent
than what pass does, which is really just pass the arguments straight
through to git.

[1] id:1453561198-2893-2-git-send-email-david@tethera.net