On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 08:25:10AM -0400, David Bremner wrote:
> Konrad Hinsen writes:
> > I agree. I see notmuch as a collection of CLI tools, some of which
> > are part of the distribution and others are written by myself for
> > my specific needs. I'd like them all to share a single
> > configuration file.  In fact, I'd love to be able to add sections
> > specific to my Python scripts.
> 
> Yes, I understand that it's convenient, but the current set up is
> not really very robust…  In particular upcoming changes may move
> some configuration items out of this file and into a library level
> configuration API.

I think you mean [1].  And that's fine, since Python scripts, etc.,
can use that API to set and access config settings, be they standard
or script-specific (as far as I can tell, I haven't reviewed that
series in detail).  Docs on any standard settings would be nice, but I
guess they'd land as features moved out of ~/.notmuch-config and into
the database.  The only setting that can't move into the database (as
you pointed out earlier [2]) is the path to the database.  That's
currently all the Python bindings extract now, and making that route
the officially blessed way to find the default database path makes
sense to me.

Cheers,
Trevor

[1]: id:1452654610-22864-1-git-send-email-david@tethera.net
     http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.mail.notmuch.general/21643
[2]: id:8760yy4o3w.fsf@tesseract.cs.unb.ca
     http://article.gmane.org/gmane.mail.notmuch.general/21639

-- 
This email may be signed or encrypted with GnuPG (http://www.gnupg.org).
For more information, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy