Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of pieter@praet.org designates
	10.180.99.7 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.180.99.7; 
From: Pieter Praet <pieter@praet.org>
To: Tomi Ollila <tomi.ollila@iki.fi>, David Bremner <david@tethera.net>,
	Dmitry Kurochkin <dmitry.kurochkin@gmail.com>, notmuch@notmuchmail.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 00/12] emacs: more flexible and consistent tagging
	operations
In-Reply-To: <m2wr781gaa.fsf@guru.guru-group.fi>
References: <1327725684-5887-1-git-send-email-dmitry.kurochkin@gmail.com>
	<1328426033-21480-1-git-send-email-dmitry.kurochkin@gmail.com>
	<87wr7xqpuf.fsf@rocinante.cs.unb.ca> <878vjtqhcg.fsf@praet.org>
	<87haye6g1c.fsf@zancas.localnet>
	<m2wr781gaa.fsf@guru.guru-group.fi>
User-Agent: Notmuch/0.11.1+210~g6afc43e (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.3.1
	(x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 20:34:13 +0100
Message-ID: <87k436ycp6.fsf@praet.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Precedence: list

On Mon, 27 Feb 2012 16:50:53 +0200, Tomi Ollila <tomi.ollila@iki.fi> wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 12:20:31 -0400, David Bremner <david@tethera.net> wrote:
> > On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 00:07:27 +0100, Pieter Praet <pieter@praet.org> wrote:
> > > On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 11:58:32 -0400, David Bremner <david@tethera.net> wrote:
> > > > On Sun,  5 Feb 2012 11:13:41 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin <dmitry.kurochkin@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > How about if '*' applies to all messages (as it currently does),
> > > but 'C-u *' only to open messages?  That would make more sense IMHO.
> > > 
> > > But, conforming to your original request, I've implemented the inverse.
> > > 
> > 
> > Thanks for implementing that. I could live with either way. Do other
> > people have opinions on this? My reasoning is if you descend into a
> > thread from some search page, it seems likely that you want to operate
> > on the messages matching the search.
> 
> I've pretty soon lost the original open/close status as I often navigate
> through messages by opening/closing messages, so for me not operating
> on all messages in thread is magic behaviour. In case I'd use C-u *
> I first have to check through the full thread what are the actual
> messages currently open (lots of screen scrolling :( )
>

I share your sentiment.  Also, the function is called `notmuch-show-tag-all',
so having it operate only on open messages would be counterintuitive IMO.

In other words, I think of the prefix arg as being a modifier for the
meaning of 'all'.

But either way, it's fairly trivial to invert its behavior [1].

> So, I prefer '*' operating on all messages in a thread and C-u '*'
> for all open messages in a thread.
> 
> > 
> > d
> 
> Tomi


Peace

-- 
Pieter

[1] id:"87sjhz22vw.fsf@praet.org"