Re: [PATCH 3/4] config: only set search.exclude_tags to "deleted; spam; " during...

diff --git a/3b/46c40eb43714e2da93defbd758d7464cd5d690 b/3b/46c40eb43714e2da93defbd758d7464cd5d690
new file mode 100644 (file)
index 0000000..f511fba
--- /dev/null
+++ b/3b/46c40eb43714e2da93defbd758d7464cd5d690
@@ -0,0 +1,105 @@
+Return-Path: <pieter@praet.org>\r
+X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])\r
+       by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34B9F429E54\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Sun, 22 Jan 2012 21:07:23 -0800 (PST)\r
+X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org\r
+X-Spam-Flag: NO\r
+X-Spam-Score: -0.7\r
+X-Spam-Level: \r
+X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5\r
+       tests=[RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=disabled\r
+Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1])\r
+       by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)\r
+       with ESMTP id hjtnqYDkpkw6 for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;\r
+       Sun, 22 Jan 2012 21:07:22 -0800 (PST)\r
+Received: from mail-wi0-f181.google.com (mail-wi0-f181.google.com\r
+       [209.85.212.181]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))\r
+       (No client certificate requested)\r
+       by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6F8C3429E40\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Sun, 22 Jan 2012 21:07:22 -0800 (PST)\r
+Received: by wibhi8 with SMTP id hi8so319654wib.26\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Sun, 22 Jan 2012 21:07:21 -0800 (PST)\r
+Received: by 10.180.24.105 with SMTP id t9mr10754004wif.19.1327295240935;\r
+       Sun, 22 Jan 2012 21:07:20 -0800 (PST)\r
+Received: from localhost ([109.131.95.182])\r
+       by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id fr8sm27759291wib.10.2012.01.22.21.07.20\r
+       (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);\r
+       Sun, 22 Jan 2012 21:07:20 -0800 (PST)\r
+From: Pieter Praet <pieter@praet.org>\r
+To: Jameson Graef Rollins <jrollins@finestructure.net>,\r
+       Xavier Maillard <xma@gnu.org>, Austin Clements <amdragon@MIT.EDU>\r
+Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] config: only set search.exclude_tags to "deleted;\r
+ spam; " during setup\r
+In-Reply-To: <874nvnqrgq.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>\r
+References: <1326586654-16840-3-git-send-email-amdragon@mit.edu>\r
+       <1327000744-25463-1-git-send-email-pieter@praet.org>\r
+       <1327000744-25463-4-git-send-email-pieter@praet.org>\r
+       <m2r4yr2xmy.fsf@kcals.intra.maillard.im>\r
+       <874nvnqrgq.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>\r
+User-Agent: Notmuch/0.11+101~g94bf862 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.3.1\r
+       (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)\r
+Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 06:05:27 +0100\r
+Message-ID: <87ipk3au08.fsf@praet.org>\r
+MIME-Version: 1.0\r
+X-Gm-Message-State:\r
+ ALoCoQl/002Bg6SZWyUcLSORRqXSNSTTYjT1xCmK0K1uUJTNqrcFX6eYsRICweZkimARyjPNFenj\r
+Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii\r
+Cc: Notmuch Mail <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>\r
+X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13\r
+Precedence: list\r
+List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system."\r
+       <notmuch.notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Unsubscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/options/notmuch>,\r
+       <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=unsubscribe>\r
+List-Archive: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch>\r
+List-Post: <mailto:notmuch@notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Help: <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=help>\r
+List-Subscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch>,\r
+       <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=subscribe>\r
+X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 05:07:23 -0000\r
+\r
+On Sun, 22 Jan 2012 14:53:41 -0800, Jameson Graef Rollins <jrollins@finestructure.net> wrote:\r
+> On Sun, 22 Jan 2012 23:14:13 +0100, Xavier Maillard <xavier@maillard.im> wrote:\r
+> > \r
+> > On Thu, 19 Jan 2012 20:19:03 +0100, Pieter Praet <pieter@praet.org> wrote:\r
+> > > If the 'search.exclude_tags' option is missing from the config file,\r
+> > > its value is automatically set to "deleted;spam;".  Taking PoLS/DWIM\r
+> > > into account, this should probably only happen during setup.\r
+> > > \r
+> > > This patch is actually Austin Clements' work:\r
+> > >   id:"20120117203211.GQ16740@mit.edu"\r
+> > \r
+> > I do not think this is a sane default. As I told it in another post. I\r
+> > do not expect notmuch to skew my search queries not that I specifically\r
+> > asked.\r
+> \r
+> Hi, Xavier.  Do you currently mark things as "deleted" or "spam"?  If\r
+> not, this would have no affect on your search results.  If you do, do\r
+> you currently expect those messages to show up in searches?  If so, why\r
+> did you mark them as "deleted" or "spam" to begin with?\r
+> \r
+> I agree with your point in principle (ie. I don't generally want my\r
+> searches tampered with behind the scenes) but the issue here is about\r
+> messages that have been explicitly tagged as a form of "trash".  Trash\r
+> is by it's nature something you're trying to get rid of.  If you wanted\r
+> to find something in the future, why would you put it in the trash in\r
+> the first place?\r
+> \r
+\r
+You definitely have a point, but then again, who are we to assume that\r
+the terms "deleted" and "spam" have the *exact* same meaning for\r
+everyone?  (also see id:"8739bbo0br.fsf@praet.org")\r
+\r
+IMHO, this is one of those options that should remain disabled until\r
+*explicitly* set by the user.\r
+\r
+> jamie.\r
+\r
+\r
+Peace\r
+\r
+-- \r
+Pieter\r