From: Jesse Rosenthal <jrosenthal@jhu.edu>
To: Daniel Schoepe <daniel.schoepe@googlemail.com>,
	Xavier Maillard <xma@gnu.org>, mueen@nawaz.org, notmuch@notmuchmail.org
Subject: Re: Header and other questions
In-Reply-To: <87vcxad6d6.fsf@gilead.home.box>
References: <878vu8edvf.fsf@fester.com> <m2sjsfmxvo.fsf@gnu.org>
	<87hb8vwqww.fsf@lucky.home> <87vcxad6d6.fsf@gilead.home.box>
User-Agent: Notmuch/0.5-192-gecd6549 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.3.1
	(i486-pc-linux-gnu)
Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 11:27:52 -0400
Message-ID: <874o4uy8av.fsf@gogo.home>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Precedence: list


Hi,

On Mon, 16 May 2011 17:15:17 +0200, Daniel Schoepe <daniel.schoepe@googlemail.com> wrote:
> I think this is only a subset of the requested functionality, since one
> can only tag consecutive threads at once.

It seems like for non-consecutive messages to be tagged, there'd have to
be some sort of mutt-style message-marking facility. There was some
discussion when the feature was first introduced about whether to go
with region or marking. I think I wrote a quick version of both. (I just
checked -- that uncertainty is actually still there in the commit msg of
4c9585933 where the region feature comes in.)

The decision, if I remember correctly, was that regions are so intuitive
for emacs users, and many people reported trying to tag by region
without thinking about it, that this approach would make sense for the
emacs interface. In other words, keep the emacs interface emacsy. I
think I still agree with that, since I feel like having both would be
confusing (what do you do when you select a marked-line in a region?)
and I like the one I tend toward intuitively. But I certainly see the
benefit of the other functionality as well.

Best,
Jesse