Return-Path: X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B60886DE140C for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 07:44:22 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at cworth.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.721 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.721 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Received: from arlo.cworth.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (arlo.cworth.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id valODg2EV2Qp for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 07:44:19 -0800 (PST) X-Greylist: delayed 550 seconds by postgrey-1.35 at arlo; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 07:44:18 PST Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E788E6DE0C66 for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 07:44:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FE6620620 for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 10:35:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from frontend2 ([10.202.2.161]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 10 Jan 2016 10:35:07 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nospammail.net; h= content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:message-id :mime-version:subject:to:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=mesmtp; bh=TCZ TXs0cx1sI226mD3PVmcPGq2M=; b=jqjQ8UMX3tv8f5lQNFe2m7lo7mtknxvWegZ gcGodhmLJxb8Q0tu2W4XwISBW7WFmYyxI7OjetqWXAKaj0cANAryarPnY+aoAi2b nZBZFXp2I/seavVtPfUNOXTUTYFaCNlVOJwAgQ/4zKW+p/AqXaloVAH8/nBTc1kz dnM2vDbk= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:to:x-sasl-enc :x-sasl-enc; s=smtpout; bh=TCZTXs0cx1sI226mD3PVmcPGq2M=; b=e2u5L wJGqi/FBdncANinw3VVCPG1ghAaC3C6UYBHR7CGdlFkEhy47zSfCqhRB1lQf8GOx 2ndUHl00+7Vi6QTRtbPO6YV3rvwVaxEk7uKa7pw42b8D6ihrpJI44WHQwFk5kZiz sDnXejfW+FSz0YC6y2IoWbHZYlwqg+jVsDl8AM= X-Sasl-enc: RG9uon+MpPgDh4AvNw4ivLHUqCxJ3K3LPHBSHicdv8nr 1452440107 Received: from sysoppad.localnet (cust-5286ecc8.wba.access.stipte.nl [82.134.236.200]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 140276800E0 for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 10:35:07 -0500 (EST) From: Erik Quaeghebeur To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org Subject: Message-ID's vs. Resent-Message-ID Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 16:35:04 +0100 Message-ID: <2154153.mZhPRoAGrk@sysoppad> User-Agent: KMail/4.14.8 (Linux/4.1.12-gentoo; KDE/4.14.8; x86_64; ; ) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 15:44:22 -0000 Hi, I've become interested in notmuch. After looking at the documentation of the Python bindings, I have the following questions: * Is it correct that a message's Message-ID used as its unique key in the notmuch database? * If yes, is it correct that two messages with the same Message-ID, but with different contents/other headers, will have only one entry in the database? * If yes, for resent messages (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2822#section-3.6.6), does notmuch use (the chronologically last) Resent-Message-ID, or the Message-ID? Best, Erik