On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 16:19:44 -0600, Mark Anderson <ma.skies@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 13:54:40 -0700, Jameson Graef Rollins <jrollins@finestructure.net> wrote: > > On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 14:21:11 -0600, Mark Anderson <ma.skies@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I personally prefer --output=files remain as it was, with one file per > > > mail (even though I submitted the patch to change it). I suggest that > > > we could add another format to supply all files (perhaps > > > --output=allfiles, or --output=dupfiles). I don't like my original > > > suggestion of "filelists" because it implies a list of lists to me. A > > > list of lists would correlate better to the number of messages which > > > match the search terms, but doesn't correlate well to xargs input. > > > > What's wrong with just outputting all the files matching the search, > > including duplicates? I can't think of any reason where one would want > > to not include all files matching the search. I would be curious to > > hear a use case there. > > For someone who is using gmail + offlineimap, labels in gmail become > folders in maildir. > > The maildir structure can have a large number of copies of each email > corresponding to the labels/tags which have been applied. > > To add a label/tag that is visible to the gmail interface, one should > copy a file representing the message to the folder representing the > gmail label, which will then sync to gmail. > > Copying more than one file for each message being labeled is more > wasteful of time and storage. Hardlinks to the rescue! > With all files returned, a simple xargs script to add a label by copying > files will end up with many copies of the same file in the new > directory. Shove in a "head -n 1" ? > The consuming script could hunt for message-id's in files and uniquify, > but since notmuch was doing that implicitly before, and it's fairly > natural, it seems not a big deal to add. > > > Since I'm on this kick anyway, I'm going to keep pushing against further > > customizations where there really isn't a need. > > With a common use case for the biggest email userbase which makes > labels/tags natural, I think it is worth considering seriously. > > There are certainly other namesets which could be used to reprecent the > two categories. I'm happy to use names that makes the 'allfiles' output > the common case and the "one file/message" the longer string, but I > think we should provide the "one file/message" output category. > > The 'allfiles' case is great for deleting all copies of an email, so I > definitely want it to continue being available. > > -Mark > > _______________________________________________ > notmuch mailing list > notmuch@notmuchmail.org > http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch Peace -- Pieter