From: Carl Worth <cworth@cworth.org>
To: Sebastian Spaeth <Sebastian@SSpaeth.de>, Jameson Rollins
	<jrollins@finestructure.net>, Notmuch Mail list <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>
In-Reply-To: <87hbp5bolv.fsf@SSpaeth.de>
References: <87ska1vh7r.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>
	<87ljes0yy0.fsf@SSpaeth.de> <87vddmwkuw.fsf@yoom.home.cworth.org>
	<87r5oa1lvo.fsf@servo.finestructure.net> <87hbp5bolv.fsf@SSpaeth.de>
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 15:35:43 -0800
Message-ID: <87vddj4lkg.fsf@yoom.home.cworth.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";
	micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Subject: Re: [notmuch] [PATCH] Simplify "unread" tag handling in emacs UI.
Precedence: list

--=-=-=
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, 25 Feb 2010 11:23:40 +0100, "Sebastian Spaeth" <Sebastian@SSpaeth.d=
e> wrote:
> Well, it is fatal in the sense that it makes that function useless. But
> it's not as bad as it is currently unused.

Right. I didn't want to push something out with a known-broken function.

I would have rather the patch just remove the function in that case,
(but the fact that someone noticed the broken function meant that
someone actually *was* using it and removing it wouldn't be nice
either).

> I still think it's worth taking this patch and fixing it then.

Done and pushed out now.

> - split into a "notmuch-show-next-message"
>   and a notmuch-show-show-next-message (what a naming!) function.=20
>   One would merely skip to the next and one actually show and mark
>   unread.

That's the approach I took, with naming of
notmuch-show-next-message-without-marking-read. And yes, the naming we
have for our emacs functions is awful. I really dislike "notmuch-show"
as a prefix because it puts a verb in the prefix, (where I'd instead
like to just have a verb for the actual functionality of the function).

But we have to have at least *something* to separate the search-results
and message-viewing modes, (since we have commands like "archive" in
both of them). The lack of nice scoping here is really awkward.

=2DCarl

--=-=-=
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFLiFrP6JDdNq8qSWgRAhcZAJsHmEv8JafrHtO8Wf5lQIBTvj5JFgCfW3mZ
NfMo7MSuN/L0/EQBUAWbSaE=
=eNYD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-=-=--