From: Pieter Praet <pieter@praet.org>
To: Jameson Rollins <jrollins@finestructure.net>,
	notmuch <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>
Subject: Re: signed/encrypted tagging in crypto branch
In-Reply-To: <87bp1o83ij.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>
References: <4CF15D67.1070904@fifthhorseman.net>
	<87aak08fu8.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>
	<87fwsf9mip.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>
	<87tygl29vu.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>
	<87oc5yi9us.fsf@zancas.localnet>
	<87d3mdvjwz.fsf@bookbinder.fernseed.info>
	<87k4gk70ng.fsf@SSpaeth.de>
	<87sjv8i7v6.fsf@irigaray.ross.mayfirst.org>
	<87sjv86mp9.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>
	<4D6BF0AA.3070706@fifthhorseman.net>
	<874o7o6ih5.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>
	<4D6C00C7.9000705@fifthhorseman.net>
	<8739n75zdb.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>
	<87hbbno7ia.fsf@raven.defaultvalue.org>
	<87pqqb4ium.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>
	<878vwuvupl.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>
	<87bp1o83ij.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>
User-Agent: Notmuch/0.5-86-g4875299 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.1.50.1
	(x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 17:27:02 +0200
Message-ID:
 <877haub4jd.fsf@A7GMS.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Precedence: list

On Sun, 06 Mar 2011 11:15:00 -0800, Jameson Rollins <jrollins@finestructure.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 05 Mar 2011 00:26:46 -0800, Jameson Rollins <jrollins@finestructure.net> wrote:
> > Hey, folks.  I just pushed a couple of patches to my "crypto" branch [0]
> > that add support for auto-tagging of multipart/signed and
> > multipart/encrypted messages with the "signed" and "encrypted" tags
> > respectively.  Only new messages are thus tagged, so a database rebuild
> > is required to auto-tag old messages.
> 
> So I realized last night, what now seems obvious, that restoring tags
> after a notmuch new will override any initial auto tagging.  This means
> that doing a database rebuild will *not* crypto tag all your old mail if
> you then restore tags from a tag dump afterwords.
> 
> I'm not sure if there's anything that can be done about this.  I think
> we either have to have a way to merge tags, or the signed and encrypted
> indicators need to exist in a different field in the database.  Tags
> allow more flexibility in the UIs, but maybe we could just tag based on
> a the new database field somehow?
> 
> It's not such a big deal that we only get "signed" and "encrypted" from
> here forward, but it would be nice to re-tag old messages this way.  I
> can imagine that something like this will come up again in the future,
> and it would be nice if we had a solution.  I'm open to suggestions.
> 
> jamie.
Non-text part: application/pgp-signature
> _______________________________________________
> notmuch mailing list
> notmuch@notmuchmail.org
> http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch


As long as we're talking solely about "signed" and "encrypted" (so no
verification-wise information whatsoever), I'd definitely vote for a
dedicated database field.

It's absolutely immutable metadata, embedded in the message content.

No point in using tags for that, though it's not mutually exclusive:
"notmuch tag +signed -- is:signed" (or whatever, knock yourself out)

If folders -which DO change, although rarely- got one, so should crypto.


...but that's just my (insufficiently) humble opinion.


Peace

-Pieter