Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of dmitry.kurochkin@gmail.com
	designates 10.204.152.7 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=10.204.152.7; 
From: Dmitry Kurochkin <dmitry.kurochkin@gmail.com>
To: Austin Clements <amdragon@MIT.EDU>, Tomi Ollila <tomi.ollila@iki.fi>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Make notmuch-show-refresh-view retain state by
 default
In-Reply-To: <20120219172541.GQ5991@mit.edu>
References: <1329632533-16152-1-git-send-email-amdragon@mit.edu>
	<m2k43jw43j.fsf@guru.guru-group.fi> <20120219172541.GQ5991@mit.edu>
User-Agent: Notmuch/0.11.1+188~ga5674c2 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.3.1
	(x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2012 21:29:56 +0400
Message-ID: <87zkceloiz.fsf@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: notmuch@notmuchmail.org
Precedence: list

On Sun, 19 Feb 2012 12:25:41 -0500, Austin Clements <amdragon@MIT.EDU> wrote:
> Quoth Tomi Ollila on Feb 19 at 11:43 am:
> > On Sun, 19 Feb 2012 01:22:10 -0500, Austin Clements <amdragon@MIT.EDU> wrote:
> > > Based on the thread at id:"20120213152858.GO27039@mit.edu" it seems
> > > like people want show refresh to retain message state by default (I
> > > certainly do), rather than reset it by default.  As a nice bonus, this
> > > fixes a broken test.
> > 
> > Hmm
> > 
> > Every '=' keypress in a thread removes 'unread' tag from next unread 
> > message :o
> 
> Oh dear.  It's slightly subtler than that, though.  Refreshing will
> remove the unread tag from the first message matching the query.  (I
> suspect you had tag:unread in your query?)  This is particularly
> confusing for state-retaining refresh because that message might not
> even be open.
> 
> > That is probably desirable feature when refreshing view without
> > retaining state. Also, probably notmuch-show-refresh-view should
> > be fixed not to mark next message unread when retaining state ?
> 
> I would argue that refresh should never have side-effects, so neither
> case should mark anything read.  I'll send a v2.

I agree.  But this looks like a separate issue, no?  So why v2 instead
of a separate patch/series?

Regards,
  Dmitry

> _______________________________________________
> notmuch mailing list
> notmuch@notmuchmail.org
> http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch