Re: [Nmh-workers] nmh in near, medium, and far-term

[Jon Fairbairn]

David Levine <address@hidden> writes:
> I'm also wary of changing the message file naming scheme.
> anno modifies messages, so it is inconsistent with a naming
> scheme that includes file size, hash, or other properties.
> I could probably live without anno, but someone else might
> consider it important.

Me, for example, which is why my suggested change to naming
scheme is /almost/ something you can do in mh already by
automatically filing messages in (say) +Accessions/${date +%s}
(something would have to create such a folder for each inc) and
refile -link each new message into +inbox (or wherever it would
normally go).

The trouble with that is that while one could then incrementally
archive the Accessions folders, incremental archival of the
contents of the other folders would either duplicate the content
of message files or require a (potentially costly) search to
determine which file in the Accessions folders should be linked
to. Perhaps all I want is a -symlink option for refile and a
guarantee that all mh progs can be told to treat symlinked
messages as if they were linked?

-- 
Jón Fairbairn                                 address@hidden