Re: search summary and exclusions

diff --git a/f9/0ecbef6925e6c8e1842623867b964938a185fc b/f9/0ecbef6925e6c8e1842623867b964938a185fc
new file mode 100644 (file)
index 0000000..65903e9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/f9/0ecbef6925e6c8e1842623867b964938a185fc
@@ -0,0 +1,126 @@
+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 D600D431FAF\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Mon, 28 May 2012 11:54:35 -0700 (PDT)\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 9Ec93RCX2wG8 for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;\r
+       Mon, 28 May 2012 11:54:35 -0700 (PDT)\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 3D4AF431FAE\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Mon, 28 May 2012 11:54:35 -0700 (PDT)\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 1SZ55J-0001bP-Fz; Mon, 28 May 2012 19:54:29 +0100\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 1SZ55J-0004f9-7B; Mon, 28 May 2012 19:54:29 +0100\r
+From: Mark Walters <markwalters1009@gmail.com>\r
+To: Peter Wang <novalazy@gmail.com>, notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Subject: Re: search summary and exclusions\r
+In-Reply-To: <20120529000012.GF2331@hili.localdomain>\r
+References: <20120529000012.GF2331@hili.localdomain>\r
+User-Agent: Notmuch/0.13+55~g992aa73 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.3.1\r
+       (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)\r
+Date: Mon, 28 May 2012 19:54:31 +0100\r
+Message-ID: <871um4nnko.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: 61e92b8b684f7dc1e3d9fe47d79834fe (of first 20000 bytes)\r
+X-SpamAssassin-Score: -1.8\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 -1.8 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
+       *  0.5 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: Mon, 28 May 2012 18:54:36 -0000\r
+\r
+\r
+Hi\r
+\r
+On Mon, 28 May 2012, Peter Wang <novalazy@gmail.com> wrote:\r
+> Hi,\r
+>\r
+> Exclusions don't work the way I expected with the search command and\r
+> --output=summary.  I would like messages with excluded tags to be\r
+> treated as if they don't exist at all, but currently:\r
+>\r
+>   * excluded messages are counted towards the "total"\r
+>   * excluded tags are included in the "tags" set\r
+>\r
+> Are these deliberate?  Especially the second point seems to conflict\r
+> with search --output=tags, which doesn't show excluded tags.\r
+\r
+The general idea is that commands that deciding whether something\r
+matches the search checks the excludes but constructing a thread does\r
+not. The difference in tags when outputting tags and summary is that the\r
+former outputs tags of *messages* matching the query (so respects the\r
+excludes) whereas summary outputs the tags of all messages in threads\r
+matching the query (so does not respect the excludes) but see below for\r
+more precise explanations.\r
+\r
+notmuch search --output=tags <search>\r
+\r
+The tags from messages which match the search and are not excluded are\r
+returned.\r
+\r
+notmuch search --output=threads <search>\r
+\r
+returns all threads containing a message which matches the search and is\r
+not excluded\r
+\r
+notmuch search --output=summary <search>\r
+\r
+returns the summary output of all these threads. The summary output\r
+includes all tags of all messages (whether excluded or not) of the\r
+thread and the count is the number of messages (including excluded\r
+messages) of the thread.\r
+\r
+This seems consistent with\r
+\r
+notmuch show --entire-thread <search>\r
+\r
+which returns all messages (whether excluded or not) of all these\r
+threads.\r
+\r
+Best wishes\r
+\r
+Mark\r