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