On Fri, 05 Feb 2010 17:41:48 -0800, Carl Worth <cworth@cworth.org> wrote: [talking about gitmuch, a simple wrapper around notmuch dump && git commit] > > And it's interesting that this script might be just good enough for the > synchronization needs of some people. It's not integrated, and might > require manual fixup of any resulting git conflicts, but it might be > handy for some. > I have to say that merge conflicts are not very much fun. I tend to do a certain amount of oh, take all the changes from the server. I wonder if the approach that someone else mentioned of keeping a file tags/message-id with the appropriate tags in it might make merging less painful. > The biggest problem I see is that if I were to read some messages > locally, and then run "gitmuch restore" then this would wipe out the > local changes I had made. So we'll definitely want a more integrated > solution to eliminate the chance of problems like this. Yeah, the footgun potential is definitely there. > One easy answer is to just make "notmuch restore" do nothing for > messages where the existing tags are the same as the tags mentioned in > the input file. I just pushed a change to implement this, (along with > new tests for "notmuch dump" and "notmuch restore" of course). Heh, I think I later posted a patch to do that as well. d