Re: [PATCH] remove message archiving from show-advance-and-archive

diff --git a/b7/2cbfa894585fd529304be9fe0fc7670603d87e b/b7/2cbfa894585fd529304be9fe0fc7670603d87e
new file mode 100644 (file)
index 0000000..3c7dfb7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/b7/2cbfa894585fd529304be9fe0fc7670603d87e
@@ -0,0 +1,123 @@
+Return-Path: <cworth@cworth.org>\r
+X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])\r
+       by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B80514196F3\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Wed,  9 Jun 2010 12:33:32 -0700 (PDT)\r
+X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org\r
+X-Spam-Flag: NO\r
+X-Spam-Score: -2.89\r
+X-Spam-Level: \r
+X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.89 tagged_above=-999 required=5\r
+       tests=[ALL_TRUSTED=-1, BAYES_00=-1.9, T_MIME_NO_TEXT=0.01]\r
+       autolearn=ham\r
+Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1])\r
+       by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)\r
+       with ESMTP id VZFv8-NsT-qF; Wed,  9 Jun 2010 12:33:22 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: from yoom.home.cworth.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])\r
+       by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E882431FC1;\r
+       Wed,  9 Jun 2010 12:33:22 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: by yoom.home.cworth.org (Postfix, from userid 1000)\r
+       id AFB51568E39; Wed,  9 Jun 2010 12:33:21 -0700 (PDT)\r
+From: Carl Worth <cworth@cworth.org>\r
+To: Jameson Rollins <jrollins@finestructure.net>,\r
+       Dirk Hohndel <hohndel@infradead.org>,\r
+       Notmuch Mail <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>\r
+Subject: Re: [PATCH] remove message archiving from show-advance-and-archive\r
+In-Reply-To: <87sk4wvwqy.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>\r
+References: <87zkz4xnf4.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>\r
+       <871vcghz8o.fsf@yoom.home.cworth.org>\r
+       <m3sk4wdq4g.fsf@x201s.gr8dns.org>\r
+       <87sk4wvwqy.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>\r
+User-Agent: Notmuch/0.3.1-61-ge870437 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.1.1\r
+       (i486-pc-linux-gnu)\r
+Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2010 12:33:21 -0700\r
+Message-ID: <87vd9sgfwe.fsf@yoom.home.cworth.org>\r
+MIME-Version: 1.0\r
+Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";\r
+       micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"\r
+X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13\r
+Precedence: list\r
+List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system."\r
+       <notmuch.notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Unsubscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/options/notmuch>,\r
+       <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=unsubscribe>\r
+List-Archive: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch>\r
+List-Post: <mailto:notmuch@notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Help: <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=help>\r
+List-Subscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch>,\r
+       <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=subscribe>\r
+X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2010 19:33:32 -0000\r
+\r
+--=-=-=\r
+Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable\r
+\r
+On Wed, 09 Jun 2010 15:20:21 -0400, Jameson Rollins <jrollins@finestructure=\r
+.net> wrote:\r
+> On Wed, 09 Jun 2010 11:20:47 -0700, Dirk Hohndel <hohndel@infradead.org> =\r
+wrote:\r
+> > On Wed, 09 Jun 2010 10:50:15 -0700, Carl Worth <cworth@cworth.org> wrot=\r
+e:\r
+> > I really like this. It's consistent and I'm sure I'll get used to it\r
+> > quickly. The only question now is "all messages in a thread" or "all\r
+> > open messages in a thread". I'd vote for all.\r
+\r
+I have situations in which I want either one. The advantage of doing\r
+"all open messages" is that it's easy to get the "all messages" behavior\r
+by way of an existing command that's already useful in its own right,\r
+("open all messages").\r
+\r
+And I think "all open messages" is actually the right default as\r
+well. If I do a focused search and end up reading one message that\r
+matched the search, then archiving away that message and not others that\r
+just happen to be in the same thread.\r
+\r
+> I actually vote for the behavior Carl suggests.  The behavior of\r
+> archiving the entire thread can be done by popping out to the search and\r
+> applying notmuch-search-archive-thread to the thread with:\r
+>=20\r
+> (define-key notmuch-search-mode-map "a" 'notmuch-search-archive-thread)\r
+\r
+Or not. ;-)\r
+\r
+I actually want to also fix the search mode commands like this to only\r
+operate on messages that matched the (original search).\r
+\r
+We had behavior that limited these commands to matching messages once,\r
+but that was broken because it re-ran the search to find the list. So\r
+that led to behavior like:\r
+\r
+       -inbox # archive all messages in the thread\r
+\r
+Then if the user realized that was a mistake, trying:\r
+\r
+       +inbox # new search now matches nothing, so no effect\r
+\r
+Our stop-gap solution here was to re-run a search with fewer\r
+restrictions if the first search returned an empty list.\r
+\r
+The correct solution is to remember the list of messages that matched\r
+the first time and always operate on those. That will fix the above\r
+problem and also avoid the race condition that can currently happen if\r
+notmuch new is being run asynchronously from emacs. (The race is that\r
+the user can thing he's archiving a thread with a single message but can\r
+actually archive many messages that arrived since the original search\r
+because the 'a' command is re-running the search.)\r
+\r
+=2DCarl\r
+\r
+=2D-=20\r
+carl.d.worth@intel.com\r
+\r
+--=-=-=\r
+Content-Type: application/pgp-signature\r
+\r
+-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----\r
+Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)\r
+\r
+iD8DBQFMD+yB6JDdNq8qSWgRAikuAJ94Gcoaq3yY9s8tum5Ttw464VK1YQCfWihF\r
+VD9p0k7pD/LoEJnVn83QctY=\r
+=Rjpu\r
+-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----\r
+--=-=-=--\r