Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
To: Patrick Totzke <patricktotzke@googlemail.com>, 
From: Justus Winter <4winter@informatik.uni-hamburg.de>
In-Reply-To: <20120413083358.13321.66680@megatron>
References:
 <1332291311-28954-1-git-send-email-4winter@informatik.uni-hamburg.de>
	<20120401032323.GH5949@mit.edu>
	<20120412090533.2074.78211@thinkbox.jade-hamburg.de>
	<20120412165744.GF13549@mit.edu> <20120413083358.13321.66680@megatron>
Message-ID: <20120416214554.15615.86242@thinkbox.jade-hamburg.de>
User-Agent: alot/0.3+
Subject: Re: [RFC] Split notmuch_database_close into two functions
Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2012 23:45:54 +0200
Cc: notmuch mailing list <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>
Precedence: list

Hi everyone,

Quoting Patrick Totzke (2012-04-13 10:33:58)
> Quoting Austin Clements (2012-04-01 04:23:23)
> >Maybe you could describe your use case in more detail?
> =

> Quoting Austin Clements (2012-04-12 17:57:44)
> >Quoth Justus Winter on Apr 12 at 11:05 am:
> ...
> >I see.  TL;DR
> =

> .. which should pretty much settle Austins opinion on
> libnotmuch users being second class citizens.

Na, I think you misinterpreted Austin here, I think he summarized his
position. Looking back at my mail I think I came across a lot harsher
than necessary, I'm sorry for that. Let's get back to the issue at
hand, shall we?

Both Austin and Mark seem to support the split, any other opinions?

Cheers,
Justus