[notmuch] Notmuch performance (literally, in my case)

Out of curiosity: How does notmuch perform for you? I just started using it on a daily basis last week. I love the power that notmuch provides and the emacs interface is surprisingly usable after you've gotten used to it, but that being said, I've been quite surprised by how poorly the kernel resp

[notmuch] Notmuch performance (literally, in my case)

Out of curiosity: How does notmuch perform for you? I just started using it on a daily basis last week. I love the power that notmuch provides and the emacs interface is surprisingly usable after you've gotten used to it, but that being said, I've been quite surprised by how poorly the kernel resp

[notmuch] Thread-level results vs message-level searching

Hi, Is there a way to, say, find all messages with the tag ?inbox? but that doesn?t have the last mail have me as a sender? Sandra

[notmuch] [PATCH] Fix invalid JSON output for NULL strings

On Sun, 14 Mar 2010 15:01:28 -0400, James Westby wrote: > On Sun, 14 Mar 2010 19:19:11 +0100, Michal Sojka > wrote: > > Mails with empty body produced the following output: > > "body": [{"id": 1, "content-type": "text/plain", "content": (null)}] > > The (null) is not valid JSON syntax. > > I

[notmuch] [PATCH] Produce valid JSON output even if mail body is empty

Mails with empty body produced the following output: "body": [{"id": 1, "content-type": "text/plain", "content": (null)}] The (null) is not valid JSON syntax. This patch changes the output to: "body": [{"id": 1, "content-type": "text/plain", "content": ""}] Signed-off-by: Michal Sojka --- n

[notmuch] Notmuch command interface

On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 17:03:04 +0100, "Sebastian Spaeth" wrote: > On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 16:03:34 +0100, Michal Sojka > wrote: > > On Fri, 12 Mar 2010, Sebastian Spaeth wrote: > > > > Unfortunately, I didn't make much progress in implementating this, but > > > > it's definitely a priority for me beca

[notmuch] compose-mail vs message-mail

I took a look at notmuch.el and it uses message-mail hard-coded at a few places. My suggestion is to instead substitute compose-mail, which will honor the variable ‘mail-user-agent’. Then, the only problem is the function notmuch-reply, which has a call to message-mode hard-coded. I don’t know

[notmuch] [PATCH] Produce valid JSON output even if mail body is empty

On Sun, 14 Mar 2010 19:19:11 +0100, Michal Sojka wrote: > Mails with empty body produced the following output: > "body": [{"id": 1, "content-type": "text/plain", "content": (null)}] > The (null) is not valid JSON syntax. Is this just something that can happen with the body? I've see (null) in

[notmuch] Thread-level results vs message-level searching

Hi, Is there a way to, say, find all messages with the tag “inbox” but that doesn’t have the last mail have me as a sender? Sandra ___ notmuch mailing list notmuch@notmuchmail.org http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch

[notmuch] [PATCH] Fix invalid JSON output for NULL strings

On Sun, 14 Mar 2010 15:01:28 -0400, James Westby wrote: > On Sun, 14 Mar 2010 19:19:11 +0100, Michal Sojka wrote: > > Mails with empty body produced the following output: > > "body": [{"id": 1, "content-type": "text/plain", "content": (null)}] > > The (null) is not valid JSON syntax. > > Is t

Re: [notmuch] [PATCH] Produce valid JSON output even if mail body is empty

On Sun, 14 Mar 2010 19:19:11 +0100, Michal Sojka wrote: > Mails with empty body produced the following output: > "body": [{"id": 1, "content-type": "text/plain", "content": (null)}] > The (null) is not valid JSON syntax. Is this just something that can happen with the body? I've see (null) in

[notmuch] [PATCH] Produce valid JSON output even if mail body is empty

Mails with empty body produced the following output: "body": [{"id": 1, "content-type": "text/plain", "content": (null)}] The (null) is not valid JSON syntax. This patch changes the output to: "body": [{"id": 1, "content-type": "text/plain", "content": ""}] Signed-off-by: Michal Sojka --- n

Re: [notmuch] Notmuch command interface

On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 17:03:04 +0100, "Sebastian Spaeth" wrote: > On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 16:03:34 +0100, Michal Sojka wrote: > > On Fri, 12 Mar 2010, Sebastian Spaeth wrote: > > > > Unfortunately, I didn't make much progress in implementating this, but > > > > it's definitely a priority for me becaus