This is a thin wrapper around the Xapian metadata API. The job of this
layer is to keep the config key value pairs from colliding with other
metadata by transparently prefixing the keys, along with the usual glue
to provide a C interface.
The split of _get_config into two functions is to allow returning of the
return value with different memory ownership semantics.
The Ruby bindings were missing a way to get all the tags of the
database. Now you should be able to access this with the public
instance method `all_tags` of your database object.
Example of use:
notmuchdb = Notmuch::Database.new path, { :create => false,
:mode => Notmuch::MODE_READ_ONLY }
my_tags = notmuchdb.all_tags
my_tags.each { |tag|
print tag
}
my_tags.destroy!
Amended by db: improve error reporting, add test
Files in test directories had only copyright of a single individual,
of which code was adapted here as a base of the test system.
Since then many Notmuch Developers have contributed to the test
system, which is now acknowledged with a constant string in some
of the test files.
The README file in test directory instructed new files contain a
copyright notice, but that has never been done (and it is also not
needed). To simplify things a bit (and lessen confusion) this
instruction is now removed.
As a side enchangement, all of the 3 entries in the whole source
tree cd'ing to `dirname` of "$0" now uses syntax cd "$(dirname "$0")".
This makes these particular lines work when current working directory
is e.g. /c/Program Files/notmuch/test/.
(Probably it would fail elsewhere, though.)
This binding is similar to mutt's, which is
bind {mode} b "bounce-message" # remail a message to another user
where {mode} is 'index', 'pager' or 'attach'.
The new function notmuch-show-message-resend re-sends
message to new recipients using #'message-resend.
Recipients are read from minibuffer as a comma-separated
string (with some keyboard support including tab completion).
Final confirmation before sending is asked.
In case of notmuch reply and notmuch show --part=N it is required that
search terms match to one message. If match count was != 1, error
message "Error: search term did not match precisely one message"
was too vague to explain what happened.
By appending (matched <num> messages) to the error message it
makes the problem more understandable (e.g when <num> is '0'
user reckons the query had a typo in it).
By combining the common parts of CONFIGURE_CFLAGS and CONFIGURE_CXXFLAGS
to a separate make variable and using that as part of their
definitions makes setting of these easier, DRYer and less error prone
(especially as we cannot check potential typing errors there).
In case of any unset variable, make ./configure exit with nonzero value;
an attempt to expand an unset variable is a bug in the script
(usually a spelling mistake) and those should not pass through
unnoticed.
When composing messages (including replies, etc.), indicate to
`message-mode' definitively that the message is email (as opposed to
Usenet news) rather than having it attempt to determine this for itself.
This causes `message-mode' to observe such variables as
`message-default-mail-headers', which previously happened haphazardly.
`notmuch--get-bodypart-raw' previously assumed that all non-binary MIME
parts could be successfully read by assuming that they were UTF-8
encoded. This was demonstrated to be wrong, specifically when a part was
marked as ISO8859-1 and included accented characters (which were
incorrectly rendered as a result).
Rather than assuming UTF-8, attempt to use the part's declared charset
when reading it, falling back to US-ASCII if the declared charset is
unknown, unsupported or invalid.
Note: this patch drops -w from the shebang line, but we still have
"use warnings" in the script, which is superior anyhow.
Thanks Andreas Tolfsen for the suggestion.
A non-technical introduction for users who read NEWS to have better
chance to find ./devel/notmuch-emacs-mua when they test or experiment
with notmuch emacs MUA next time.
The usual make message on everything being up to date is:
make: Nothing to be done for 'all'.
However, since
commit d038b93209
Author: David Bremner <david@tethera.net>
Date: Mon Jun 1 09:08:59 2015 +0200
build: integrate building ruby bindings into notmuch build process
if one doesn't have the ruby dependencies installed, the message has
been:
Missing dependency, skipping ruby bindings
Restore the usual behaviour by dropping the message. It's redundant
during build anyway, since the configure script already outputs:
Checking for ruby development files... No (skipping ruby bindings)
To fully complete the ghost-on-removal-when-shared-thread-exists
proposal, we need to clear all ghost messages when the last active
message is removed from a thread.
Amended by db: Remove the last test of T530, as it no longer makes sense
if we are garbage collecting ghost messages.
There is no need to add a ghost message upon deletion if there are no
other active messages in the thread.
Also, if the message being deleted was a ghost already, we can just go
ahead and delete it.
Publicly we are only exposing the non-ghost documents (of "type"
"mail"). But internally we might want to inspect the ghost messages
as well.
This changeset adds two new private interfaces to queries to recover
information about alternate document types.
implement ghost-on-removal, the solution to T590-thread-breakage.sh
that just adds a ghost message after removing each message.
It leaks information about whether we've ever seen a given message id,
but it's a fairly simple implementation.
Note that _resolve_message_id_to_thread_id already introduces new
message_ids to the database, so i think just searching for a given
message ID may introduce the same metadata leakage.
This test (T590-thread-breakage.sh) has known-broken subtests.
If you have a two-message thread where message "B" is in-reply-to "A",
notmuch rightly sees this as a single thread.
But if you:
* remove "A" from the message store
* run "notmuch new"
* add "A" back into the message store
* re-run "notmuch new"
Then notmuch sees the messages as distinct threads.
This happens because if you insert "B" initially (before anything is
known about "A"), then a "ghost message" gets added to the database in
reference to "A" that is in the same thread, which "A" takes over when
it appears.
But if "A" is subsequently removed, no ghost message is retained, so
when "A" appears, it is treated as a new thread.
I see a few options to fix this:
ghost-on-removal
----------------
We could unilaterally add a ghost upon message removal. This has a
few disadvantages: the message index would leak information about what
messages the user has ever been exposed to, and we also create a
perpetually-growing dataset -- the ghosts can never be removed.
ghost-on-removal-when-shared-thread-exists
------------------------------------------
We could add a ghost upon message removal iff there are other
non-ghost messages with the same thread ID.
We'd also need to remove all ghost messages that share a thread when
the last non-ghost message in that thread is removed.
This still has a bit of information leakage, though: the message index
would reveal that i've seen a newer message in a thread, even if i had
deleted it from my message store
track-dependencies
------------------
rather than a simple "ghost-message" we could store all the (A,B)
message-reference pairs internally, showing which messages A reference
which other messages B.
Then removal of message X would require deleting all message-reference
pairs (X,B), and only deleting a ghost message if no (A,X) reference
pair exists.
This requires modifying the database by adding a new and fairly weird
table that would need to be indexed by both columns. I don't know
whether xapian has nice ways to do that.
scan-dependencies
-----------------
Without modifying the database, we could do something less efficient.
Upon removal of message X, we could scan the headers of all non-ghost
messages that share a thread with X. If any of those messages refers
to X, we would add a ghost message. If none of them do, then we would
just drop X entirely from the table.
---------------------
One risk of attempted fixes to this problem is that we could fail to
remove the search term indexes entirely. This test contains
additional subtests to guard against that.
This test also ensures that the right number of ghost messages exist
in each situation; this will help us ensure we don't accumulate ghosts
indefinitely or leak too much information about what messages we've
seen or not seen, while still making it easy to reassemble threads
when messages come in out-of-order.
