Re: [PATCH] How to improve the mail handling workflow?

diff --git a/ae/bdc4d21a0d7a733cae91b1841b1f9d77befb1f b/ae/bdc4d21a0d7a733cae91b1841b1f9d77befb1f
new file mode 100644 (file)
index 0000000..7b5e11b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ae/bdc4d21a0d7a733cae91b1841b1f9d77befb1f
@@ -0,0 +1,103 @@
+Return-Path: <darren@fernseed.info>\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 2374840DDE7\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Fri, 12 Nov 2010 07:39:52 -0800 (PST)\r
+X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org\r
+X-Spam-Flag: NO\r
+X-Spam-Score: 2.149\r
+X-Spam-Level: **\r
+X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.149 tagged_above=-999 required=5\r
+       tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,\r
+       DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FH_HOST_IN_ADDRARPA=2.157, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.982,\r
+       TO_NO_BRKTS_DYNIP=1, T_MIME_NO_TEXT=0.01] autolearn=no\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 1uC7va91oMi2 for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;\r
+       Fri, 12 Nov 2010 07:39:40 -0800 (PST)\r
+Received: from silentio.fernseed.info (202.4.169.217.in-addr.arpa\r
+       [217.169.4.202])\r
+       (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))\r
+       (No client certificate requested)\r
+       by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8E0BF40DDC4\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Fri, 12 Nov 2010 07:39:40 -0800 (PST)\r
+Received: from localhost (bookbinder.fernseed.info\r
+       [IPv6:2001:8b0:ff94:1:224:2cff:fe37:838b])\r
+       (Authenticated sender: darren)\r
+       by silentio.fernseed.info (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5647CF8;\r
+       Fri, 12 Nov 2010 15:39:38 +0000 (GMT)\r
+DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=fernseed.info;\r
+       s=default; t=1289576378;\r
+       bh=OJME4L9rB99914a+65+vkGg2TPNam+1iHJNmJbVxewU=;\r
+       h=From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID:\r
+       MIME-Version:Content-Type;\r
+       b=PyLi2HVFq220xU12R/eLIt69gtV7Iyo4wcmdvIY/vc47P5TbdvmBfYbxeFYKnDNnQ\r
+       OyIHeR+gzmZ4nAKgdNl13zER7qpafNusBvuZ1joIWfA22lXB+V9Y8Rp3lqP+h1Q5Cb\r
+       TIzhMW0rCdZaKrKzpkfukNjZzWnRoqowr9/43ARg=\r
+From: Darren McGuicken <mailing-notmuch@fernseed.info>\r
+To: Matthieu Lemerre <racin@free.fr>, notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Subject: Re: [PATCH] How to improve the mail handling workflow?\r
+In-Reply-To: <87fwv65zw1.fsf@free.fr>\r
+References: <87fwv65zw1.fsf@free.fr>\r
+User-Agent: Notmuch/0.5 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.1.1\r
+       (i486-pc-linux-gnu)\r
+Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 15:39:37 +0000\r
+Message-ID: <87sjz6ft52.fsf@bookbinder.fernseed.info>\r
+MIME-Version: 1.0\r
+Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";\r
+       micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"\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, 12 Nov 2010 15:39:52 -0000\r
+\r
+--=-=-=\r
+\r
+On Fri, 12 Nov 2010 16:23:58 +0100, Matthieu Lemerre <racin@free.fr> wrote:\r
+> Here is first a patch that copes with this last point. Whenever you\r
+> want to archive a thread, it finds whether you forgot to add a custom\r
+> "user" tag to a message, and if so asks you for a tag to add before\r
+> archiving. That way, I no longer have messages without any tags.\r
+\r
+Hmm, this would be very irritating in my own workflow in which I really\r
+only use a small number of tags on a fraction of my total mail archive\r
+to differentiate mail type or content which can't otherwise be\r
+determined from the indexed plain text of the message (I don't like to\r
+add a 'notmuch' tag to mail from the list for instance since a saved\r
+search for mail sent to the list address does exactly the same thing).\r
+\r
+I agree that the spacebar does too much if you're just using a search on\r
+the inbox tag and want something to stay visible even when you've\r
+quickly spacebar'd through a thread and archived it, but in my case that\r
+was easily solved by creating a new default saved search called 'todo'\r
+which collects unread, manually tagged 'todo' and mail matching a number\r
+of other criteria into one place.  When something has been followed-up\r
+on, I remove the tag.\r
+\r
+Colouring threads using notmuch-search-line-faces is also very useful in\r
+that one-stop 'todo' view.\r
+\r
+Would any of that work for you?  Why are plain text or header searches\r
+not able to find the mail you're looking for?\r
+\r
+--=-=-=\r
+Content-Type: application/pgp-signature\r
+\r
+-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----\r
+Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)\r
+\r
+iEYEARECAAYFAkzdX7kACgkQP1ao/7snsT7i/QCgx7UAjGIZBYsvlF65PCZU+EPu\r
+jCQAnjm1QJbJq2/oZpeH8q5lS2B3x5h0\r
+=Q25l\r
+-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----\r
+--=-=-=--\r