From: Carl Worth <cworth@cworth.org>
To: Jameson Rollins <jrollins@finestructure.net>, notmuch@notmuchmail.org
Subject: Re: The archive operation should only archive open messages
In-Reply-To: <87aat4ph3y.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>
References: <87633sfnyq.fsf@yoom.home.cworth.org>
	<87aat4ph3y.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2010 08:28:49 -0700
Message-ID: <87r5me2j4e.fsf@yoom.home.cworth.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";
	micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Precedence: list

--=-=-=
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 16:59:13 -0400, Jameson Rollins <jrollins@finestructure=
.net> wrote:
> I actually *really* don't like that the space bar does this.  In fact, I
> build my own notmuch-show-advance function in a notmuch-hacks.el that I
> load to expressly get around this.

Well we definitely do need that operation ("advance to next thread
without archiving" to complement our existing "advance to next thread
after archiving"). Any suggestions for what the keybinding should be for
that? What are you using?

And once we have that, changing space bar to only operate within the
current thread and not doing any advancing will definitely make it a lot
less magic and less confusing.

So I'm in favor of that at least.

>                                      The only tag manipulation I want
> done automatically is removal of "unread" when I visit a message.  Other
> than that, I want to do all tag manipulation manually.  So I would be
> thrilled is this "feature" was removed entirely, which would of course
> get rid of this bug as well.

The bug is still present for the explicit "archive this thread"
operation, (even if we disentangled it from any notion of advancing to
the next thread). So we'll still want to fix that.

> > [*] My tag:to-me is set by a script doing "notmuch tag +to-me
> > to:cworth@cworth.org or to:carl.d.worth@intel.com ...". I'd prefer this
> > to be a saved-search of course---that's one of the patches I haven't had
> > a chance to review yet.
>=20
> I've asked this in the past, but isn't this exactly what notmuch
> "folders" are?  Is there a reason you don't just define this search as a
> folder?

I can define to-me as a folder (and I do do that). The reason I want
saved searches is that I also want to have folders such as "notmuch
to-me", "cairo to-me", etc. with common sub-expressions for what to-me
means. And if I add an email address I want to be able to update that in
1 place rather than in N different folder specification.

It's probably simpler to call these "search macros" rather than "saved
searches", because that's all the feature really is.

=2DCarl

--=-=-=
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFLydOx6JDdNq8qSWgRAvO1AKCC7O+fqXLeTdoGcWWGlDA5M5tYyQCfUm0V
z+6h4kDwAxjJjCdLZq7gAGQ=
=0Ko1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-=-=--