--- /dev/null
+Return-Path: <m.walters@qmul.ac.uk>\r
+X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])\r
+ by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F665431FBF\r
+ for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Wed, 7 May 2014 23:41:32 -0700 (PDT)\r
+X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org\r
+X-Spam-Flag: NO\r
+X-Spam-Score: -1.098\r
+X-Spam-Level: \r
+X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5\r
+ tests=[DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001,\r
+ NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=1.2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=disabled\r
+Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1])\r
+ by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)\r
+ with ESMTP id 469R1dC2k66G for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;\r
+ Wed, 7 May 2014 23:41:27 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: from mail2.qmul.ac.uk (mail2.qmul.ac.uk [138.37.6.6])\r
+ (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))\r
+ (No client certificate requested)\r
+ by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A33A7431FAE\r
+ for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Wed, 7 May 2014 23:41:27 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: from smtp.qmul.ac.uk ([138.37.6.40])\r
+ by mail2.qmul.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.71)\r
+ (envelope-from <m.walters@qmul.ac.uk>)\r
+ id 1WiI1A-0005xf-TE; Thu, 08 May 2014 07:41:23 +0100\r
+Received: from 5751dfa2.skybroadband.com ([87.81.223.162] helo=localhost)\r
+ by smtp.qmul.ac.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.71)\r
+ (envelope-from <m.walters@qmul.ac.uk>)\r
+ id 1WiI1A-0001fL-Ic; Thu, 08 May 2014 07:41:20 +0100\r
+From: Mark Walters <markwalters1009@gmail.com>\r
+To: David Edmondson <dme@dme.org>, notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Subject: Re: [Patch v3 0/3] emacs: show: redesign unread/read logic\r
+In-Reply-To: <cunmweser0g.fsf@hotblack-desiato.hh.sledj.net>\r
+References: <1395777793-13297-1-git-send-email-markwalters1009@gmail.com>\r
+ <cunwqdxfwxn.fsf@hotblack-desiato.hh.sledj.net>\r
+ <87a9atmpkf.fsf@qmul.ac.uk>\r
+ <cunmweser0g.fsf@hotblack-desiato.hh.sledj.net>\r
+User-Agent: Notmuch/0.15.2+615~g78e3a93 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.4.1\r
+ (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)\r
+Date: Thu, 08 May 2014 07:41:19 +0100\r
+Message-ID: <87iopgkc1c.fsf@qmul.ac.uk>\r
+MIME-Version: 1.0\r
+Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii\r
+X-Sender-Host-Address: 87.81.223.162\r
+X-QM-Geographic: According to ripencc,\r
+ this message was delivered by a machine in Britain (UK) (GB).\r
+X-QM-SPAM-Info: Sender has good ham record. :)\r
+X-QM-Body-MD5: 805c7d5246a0e23729d5cfebc7292ba1 (of first 20000 bytes)\r
+X-SpamAssassin-Score: -0.1\r
+X-SpamAssassin-SpamBar: /\r
+X-SpamAssassin-Report: The QM spam filters have analysed this message to\r
+ determine if it is\r
+ spam. We require at least 5.0 points to mark a message as spam.\r
+ This message scored -0.1 points.\r
+ Summary of the scoring: \r
+ * 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail\r
+ provider * (markwalters1009[at]gmail.com)\r
+ * -0.1 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list\r
+X-QM-Scan-Virus: ClamAV says the message is clean\r
+X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13\r
+Precedence: list\r
+List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system."\r
+ <notmuch.notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Unsubscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/options/notmuch>,\r
+ <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=unsubscribe>\r
+List-Archive: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch>\r
+List-Post: <mailto:notmuch@notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Help: <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=help>\r
+List-Subscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch>,\r
+ <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=subscribe>\r
+X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 May 2014 06:41:32 -0000\r
+\r
+On Thu, 08 May 2014, David Edmondson <dme@dme.org> wrote:\r
+> On Wed, May 07 2014, Mark Walters wrote:\r
+>> A message is marked read if:\r
+>>\r
+>> 1) if you navigate to a message using n/p (next/prev open message) \r
+>>\r
+>> 2) if you navigate to it using N/P (next/prev message) regardless of\r
+>> whether the message is open or closed.\r
+>>\r
+>> 3) if you go to it using n.s.next-matching-message (not bound by\r
+>> default) whether message is open or closed.\r
+>>\r
+>> 4) when you enter a buffer and notmuch goes to the first open message.\r
+>>\r
+>> but not marked read in cases like:\r
+>>\r
+>> 1) opening a message\r
+>>\r
+>> 2) viewing or entering a message using other notmuch navigation such as\r
+>> notmuch-show-advance and friends (bound to space)\r
+>\r
+> My experience is that this removes the 'unread' tag.\r
+\r
+Sorry I was wrong here. This one does mark it read.\r
+\r
+>> 3) viewing or entering a message using arrow keys, page-up page-down,\r
+>> ctrl-v mouse clicks etc\r
+\r
+This is perhaps a key one: should the above mark it read.\r
+\r
+>> Personally, I think marking a closed message read is a bug,\r
+>\r
+> Agreed.\r
+>\r
+>> and not marking it read when opening it is too\r
+>\r
+> Agreed.\r
+>\r
+>> (at least in many cases).\r
+>\r
+> I would be happy with just these fixed (i.e. the current behaviour with\r
+> those two bug fixes). My typical use is to move around a thread using\r
+> Space, Backspace, n, p, N and P with RET, M-RET and C-u M-RET to\r
+> manipulate open/closed state (i.e. not the normal emacs movement\r
+> commands to move).\r
+>\r
+>> The other problem with the current approach (in my view) is that if\r
+>> you try to use the navigation commands non-interactively then messages\r
+>> end up being marked read, even if they are never displayed to the\r
+>> user.\r
+>\r
+> In what cases does this happen? (Not arguing, just not fully\r
+> understanding.)\r
+\r
+I had a series for implementing filtering (ie limiting the open\r
+messages) in show where it was the main cause of my stopping. See\r
+id:20120429005736.GK2704@mit.edu for details of the problems.\r
+\r
+>> Linking into the post-command-hook means that this should "just work".\r
+>>\r
+>> Questions: What does it mean for a message to be the current message?\r
+>> Is it just point being in the message?\r
+>\r
+> This makes sense to me, other than perhaps "point being in an _open_\r
+> message". I don't want moving point through a closed message with C-n to\r
+> remove the 'unread' tag.\r
+\r
+Oh yes I completely agree with that.\r
+\r
+Best wishes\r
+\r
+Mark\r
projects / notmuch-archives.git / commitdiff