Re: [PATCH 0/4] notmuch reply bugfix & reply to sender only

diff --git a/da/12d3bca4598ad8da72d80d24950da354113642 b/da/12d3bca4598ad8da72d80d24950da354113642
new file mode 100644 (file)
index 0000000..c1fa66e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/da/12d3bca4598ad8da72d80d24950da354113642
@@ -0,0 +1,92 @@
+Return-Path: <m.walters@qmul.ac.uk>\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 8BD63404565\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Fri,  6 Jan 2012 06:20:31 -0800 (PST)\r
+X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org\r
+X-Spam-Flag: NO\r
+X-Spam-Score: -1.098\r
+X-Spam-Level: \r
+X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5\r
+       tests=[DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001,\r
+       NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=1.2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] 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 TWUVNRo0HBws for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;\r
+       Fri,  6 Jan 2012 06:20:30 -0800 (PST)\r
+Received: from mail2.qmul.ac.uk (mail2.qmul.ac.uk [138.37.6.6])\r
+       (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))\r
+       (No client certificate requested)\r
+       by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0925C404560\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Fri,  6 Jan 2012 06:20:30 -0800 (PST)\r
+Received: from smtp.qmul.ac.uk ([138.37.6.40])\r
+       by mail2.qmul.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.71)\r
+       (envelope-from <m.walters@qmul.ac.uk>)\r
+       id 1RjAei-0000w3-63; Fri, 06 Jan 2012 14:20:28 +0000\r
+Received: from 94-192-233-223.zone6.bethere.co.uk ([94.192.233.223]\r
+       helo=localhost)\r
+       by smtp.qmul.ac.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.69)\r
+       (envelope-from <m.walters@qmul.ac.uk>)\r
+       id 1RjAeh-0003HQ-Uv; Fri, 06 Jan 2012 14:20:28 +0000\r
+From: Mark Walters <markwalters1009@gmail.com>\r
+To: Jani Nikula <jani@nikula.org>, notmuch@notmuchmail.org, david@tethera.net\r
+Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] notmuch reply bugfix & reply to sender only\r
+In-Reply-To: <87fwft80wg.fsf@nikula.org>\r
+References: <cover.1325794371.git.jani@nikula.org> <87hb0924hx.fsf@qmul.ac.uk>\r
+       <87fwft80wg.fsf@nikula.org>\r
+User-Agent: Notmuch/0.10.2+183~g99cd7be (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.3.1\r
+       (i486-pc-linux-gnu)\r
+Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2012 14:20:27 +0000\r
+Message-ID: <87zke0diac.fsf@qmul.ac.uk>\r
+MIME-Version: 1.0\r
+Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii\r
+X-Sender-Host-Address: 94.192.233.223\r
+X-QM-SPAM-Info: Sender has good ham record.  :)\r
+X-QM-Body-MD5: f0fa9e5474e168145098dde15e325e8a (of first 20000 bytes)\r
+X-SpamAssassin-Score: -1.7\r
+X-SpamAssassin-SpamBar: -\r
+X-SpamAssassin-Report: The QM spam filters have analysed this message to\r
+       determine if it is\r
+       spam. We require at least 5.0 points to mark a message as spam.\r
+       This message scored -1.7 points.\r
+       Summary of the scoring: \r
+       * -2.3 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/,\r
+       *      medium trust\r
+       *      [138.37.6.40 listed in list.dnswl.org]\r
+       * 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail\r
+       provider *      (markwalters1009[at]gmail.com)\r
+       * -0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay\r
+       *      domain\r
+       *  0.6 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list\r
+X-QM-Scan-Virus: ClamAV says the message is clean\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: Fri, 06 Jan 2012 14:20:31 -0000\r
+\r
+\r
+Hello\r
+\r
+I have now compared the two patch sets. They seem very similar but I\r
+think yours is a little bit nicer in all respects except I prefer my\r
+use of "g_mime_message_get_all_recipients (reply) == NULL".\r
+\r
+However, one case that is slightly less clear with my approach is\r
+what to do about reply-to-thread (or indeed any reply to more than one\r
+message). I did not add a reply-to-thread not_all option as I wasn't\r
+sure what it should do. Perhaps we could even make reply-to-one return\r
+an error if the search gives more than one message? \r
+\r
+Best wishes\r
+\r
+Mark\r