--- /dev/null
+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 9B667431FD4\r
+ for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Sun, 1 Jul 2012 09:48:53 -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 l0mhZzKend9t for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;\r
+ Sun, 1 Jul 2012 09:48:51 -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 1713D431FAF\r
+ for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Sun, 1 Jul 2012 09:48:51 -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 1SlNKC-0006Y7-NZ; Sun, 01 Jul 2012 17:48:46 +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 1SlNKC-0002Tw-DJ; Sun, 01 Jul 2012 17:48:40 +0100\r
+From: Mark Walters <markwalters1009@gmail.com>\r
+To: Ethan <ethan.glasser.camp@gmail.com>\r
+Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/14] modular mail stores based on URIs\r
+In-Reply-To:\r
+ <CAOJ+Ob0MSOez2MvD2fCgF7t32kFPk4g2+xCud88QmBLt_b5pOA@mail.gmail.com>\r
+References: <1340656899-5644-1-git-send-email-ethan@betacantrips.com>\r
+ <877gutnmf1.fsf@qmul.ac.uk>\r
+ <CAOJ+Ob0Kw0Kkhh9C27Xv9gvqtNowzQiNqrLAtvti7fL8NND2+w@mail.gmail.com>\r
+ <87k3yrmahu.fsf@qmul.ac.uk>\r
+ <CAOJ+Ob0MSOez2MvD2fCgF7t32kFPk4g2+xCud88QmBLt_b5pOA@mail.gmail.com>\r
+User-Agent: Notmuch/0.13.2+70~gb6a56e7 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.4.1\r
+ (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)\r
+Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2012 17:48:36 +0100\r
+Message-ID: <87lij32zrv.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: aca816c7db7a5308d47f64aa70561ee3 (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
+Cc: 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: Sun, 01 Jul 2012 16:48:53 -0000\r
+\r
+On Sun, 01 Jul 2012, Ethan <ethan.glasser.camp@gmail.com> wrote:\r
+> Thanks for going through it, I know there's a lot to go through..\r
+>\r
+> On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 4:45 PM, Mark Walters <markwalters1009@gmail.com>wrote:\r
+>\r
+>> I was thinking of just having one mail root and inside that there could\r
+>> be maildirs and mboxes. Everything would still be relative to the root.\r
+>>\r
+>\r
+> I'm hesitant to have directories that contain maildirs and mboxes. It\r
+> should be possible to unambiguously distinguish between a maildir file and\r
+> an mbox file (mboxes always start with "From ", no colon) but it sounds\r
+> kind of fragile.\r
+\r
+Well I was thinking you would still need to add specific sub-directories\r
+of db_path that might contain mboxes. \r
+\r
+>> 1. Are URIs the way to specify individual messages, despite bremner's\r
+>> > concerns about too much of the API being strings? Is adding another\r
+>> library\r
+>> > is the easiest way to parse URIs?\r
+>>\r
+>> In my opinion the nice thing about using strings is that it does not\r
+>> require\r
+>> any changes to the Xapian database to store them. I think using URIs may\r
+>> not be best though as they seem to be annoying to parse (as filenames\r
+>> can contain the same characters) and you seem to need to work around the\r
+>> parser in some cases.\r
+>>\r
+>\r
+> I think that's more the fault of the parser than of the URIs. If glib came\r
+> with a parser, that would be great. There aren't a lot of options for\r
+> pure-C URI parsing. Besides uriparser, there's also some code in the W3C\r
+> sample code library, but it looked like integrating it would be a pain so I\r
+> let it go.\r
+>\r
+> I wonder if the following would be practical: use // as the field\r
+>> separator:\r
+>>\r
+>> e.g. mbox://filename//start_of_message+length\r
+>>\r
+>> I think 2 consecutive slashes // is about the only thing we can assume\r
+>> is not in the path or filename. Since it is not in the filename I think\r
+>> parsing should be trivial (thus avoiding the extra library).\r
+>>\r
+>\r
+> Can you explain what you mean when you say that two consecutive slashes\r
+> can't appear in a URL? Ordinary filesystem paths can contain them, and so\r
+> can file: URLs. (I just looked up file:///home/ethan///////tmp and Firefox\r
+> handled that OK.) I've sometimes seen machine-generated filenames with\r
+> double slashes because that way you don't have to make sure the incoming\r
+> filename was correctly terminated before adding another level.\r
+\r
+Nothing outside notmuch (i.e. other applications creating arbitrary\r
+filenames etc) can make notmuch store a // as part of a path so if we\r
+ever do store them in the database it's our own fault. In particular\r
+notmuch can avoid them easily in that they cannot occur in a filename.\r
+\r
+\r
+>> Secondly, I would prefer to keep maildirs as just the bare file name: so\r
+>> the existence of // can be the signal that there is some other\r
+>> scheme. This is asymmetric, but is rather more backwardly compatible.\r
+>>\r
+>\r
+> Based on your and Jani's reasoning, I did this. Revised patch series\r
+> follows.\r
+\r
+I will try and look at that now.\r
+\r
+Best wishes\r
+\r
+Mark\r
+\r
projects / notmuch-archives.git / commitdiff