diff --git a/TODO b/TODO
index fa85eb7f..8e81b57d 100644
--- a/TODO
+++ b/TODO
@@ -1,6 +1,3 @@
-Write a "notmuch tag" command to add/remove tags from messages
-matching a search query.
-
 Rename notmuch_thread_results_t and notmuch_message_results_t to
 notmuch_threads_t and notmuch_messages_t respectively.
 
@@ -18,35 +15,3 @@ Audit everything for dealing with out-of-memory (and drop xutil.c).
 Write a test suite.
 
 Achieve 100% test coverage with the test suite.
-
-Think about this race condition:
-
-	A client executes "notmuch search"
-	Then executes "notmuch show" on a thread
-	While user is reading, new mail is added to database for the thread
-	Client asks for the thread to be archived.
-
-   The bug here is that email that was never read will be
-   archived. That's bad. The fix for the above is for the client to
-   archive the individual messages already retrieved and shown, not
-   the thread. (And in fact, we don't even have functions for removing
-   tags on threads.)
-
-   But this one is harder to fix:
-
-	A client executes "notmuch search"
-	While user is reading, new mail is added to database for the thread
-	Client asks for a thread to be archived.
-
-   To support this operation, (archiving a thread without even seeing
-   the individual messages), we might need to provide a command to
-   archive a thread as a whole. The problem is actually easy to fix
-   for a persistent client. It can onto the originally retrieved
-   thread objects which can hold onto the originally retrieved
-   messages. So archiving those thread objects, (and not newly created
-   thread objects), will be safe.
-
-   It's harder to fix the non-persistent "notmuch" client. One
-   approach is to simply tell the user to not run "notmuch new"
-   between reading the results of "notmuch search" and executing
-   "notmuch archive-thread" (or whatever we name it).