From: Jameson Graef Rollins <jrollins@finestructure.net>
To: Tomi Ollila <tomi.ollila@iki.fi>,
 Mark Walters <markwalters1009@gmail.com>,
	Notmuch Mail <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] emacs: modify help message for
	notmuch-search-line-faces to reflect preferred "deleted" tag name.
In-Reply-To: <m2ehrotg29.fsf@guru.guru-group.fi>
References: <87vcoaywyu.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>
	<1326826969-23545-1-git-send-email-jrollins@finestructure.net>
	<87iph06h72.fsf@qmul.ac.uk>
	<87ty0k4v5o.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>
	<m2ehrotg29.fsf@guru.guru-group.fi>
User-Agent: Notmuch/0.12+129~gfe33a4f (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.4.1
	(x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2012 22:46:17 -0700
Message-ID: <87ehro44ba.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";
	micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Precedence: list

--=-=-=

On Sun, Apr 15 2012, Tomi Ollila <tomi.ollila@iki.fi> wrote:
> id:"1326826969-23545-1-git-send-email-jrollins@finestructure.net"
>
> Does just "delete" -> "deleted" change: the only question I have left
> is that should that be left as is, this change made, or just drop
> the "delete" coloring altogether ?

Sorry, yes, I suppose this patch should still be applied.  Excludes for
"deleted" are the default, I believe, so if we are going to refer to it
in documentation we should probably be consistent.

On Sun, Apr 15 2012, Jameson Graef Rollins <jrollins@finestructure.net> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 15 2012, Mark Walters <markwalters1009@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I think the rest of the series (which provides keybindings for
>> adding/removing the delete tag to messages/threads) is worthwhile
>> particularly now the exclude stuff is fairly complete (feedback at the
>> time looked positive).
>
> Sorry, I wish I could have purged all of these series from the list.
> After a very protracted discussion on the topic it was decided that
> notmuch will not support any delete tagging operations.  Users who wish
> to do so can add support on their own:

I think my reaction here was a little strong.  I'm not remembering how I
got the impression that there was more opposition to adding delete
keybindings than there was support.  I suppose now that excludes work so
well one (not me) might consider revisiting the issue.

jamie.

--=-=-=
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
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=1gK6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-=-=--