l-m-h@web.de writes: Thanks for writing these bindings, it will be good to have the bindings (almost) catch up to the library again. We generally expect more than just a subject line in the commit message https://notmuchmail.org/contributing/#index5h2 > + def get_config(self, key): > + """Return the value of the given config key. I guess we will eventually want set_config as well, even if it's not needed for your immediate application. It might save future confusion to add them both at the same time (unless there's something complicated about adding set_config). It would be good to add a couple tests. test/T590-libconfig.sh has some C tests. I think the first one, labelled "notmuch_database_{set,get}_config" could just be translated into python (maybe even replace the C test with the python one, depending what others think). > + def get_config_list(self, prefix): I don't object to the simplified interface, but I would like to know what we can do if it becomes a performance bottleneck. Would it be possible to replace building the list with a generator (yield statement) without changing client code? or should we take the leap now?