From: Mark Walters <markwalters1009@gmail.com>
To: Jameson Graef Rollins <jrollins@finestructure.net>,
 notmuch@notmuchmail.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] cli: all search mode to include msg-ids with JSON
	output
In-Reply-To: <87y5hty5q2.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>
References: <1352487491-31512-1-git-send-email-markwalters1009@gmail.com>
	<1352487491-31512-3-git-send-email-markwalters1009@gmail.com>
	<87y5hty5q2.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>
User-Agent: Notmuch/0.14+81~g9730584 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.4.1
	(x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2012 19:35:10 +0000
Message-ID: <87pq35jus1.fsf@qmul.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Precedence: list


Hi

On Thu, 22 Nov 2012, Jameson Graef Rollins <jrollins@finestructure.net> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 09 2012, Mark Walters <markwalters1009@gmail.com> wrote:
>> This adds a --output=with-ids option which gives similar output to the
>> normal search summary output but with a list of message ids
>> too. Currently this is not implemented for text format.
>
> Hey, Mark.  Very nit-picky comment here, but I'm not sure "with-ids" is
> an appropriate name for an output type.  "with-ids" sounds like a
> modifier, as opposed to a output type unto itself.

Yes that is true: I am very happy for any suggestions. Perhaps
summary-with-ids?

> But I wonder if this separate output type is really necessary.  Can the
> emacs interface just make two separate search calls to the binary when
> constructing the buffer, one with --output=summary and one with
> --output=messages?  Wouldn't that provide all the needed info?  I guess
> there would still be a race condition, especially for really long search
> results, but I wonder if the calls could actually be made in parallel at
> the same time.  Maybe that would require more work.  Sorry, just
> thinking out loud here...

As you say this doesn't fully solve the race. But more importantly there
are two races: one for * (apply tag change to all matching messages) and
one for tagging singles threads. I don't see how this would help with
the latter. In my use this is the worrying race: I archive a thread to
say I have dealt with it but I may archive a reply which arrived after I
populated the search buffer.

Best wishes

Mark