Re: Dangerous space bar key (was: Preventing the user shooting themself in the foot)
authorAustin Clements <amdragon@MIT.EDU>
Thu, 7 Jul 2011 20:58:08 +0000 (16:58 +2000)
committerW. Trevor King <wking@tremily.us>
Fri, 7 Nov 2014 17:39:00 +0000 (09:39 -0800)
4c/17bad99f7f0dc34dc38dea73ee51a568ffa2f9 [new file with mode: 0644]

diff --git a/4c/17bad99f7f0dc34dc38dea73ee51a568ffa2f9 b/4c/17bad99f7f0dc34dc38dea73ee51a568ffa2f9
new file mode 100644 (file)
index 0000000..5989c90
--- /dev/null
@@ -0,0 +1,117 @@
+Return-Path: <amdragon@mit.edu>\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 50E72431FD0\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Thu,  7 Jul 2011 13:58:22 -0700 (PDT)\r
+X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org\r
+X-Spam-Flag: NO\r
+X-Spam-Score: -0.7\r
+X-Spam-Level: \r
+X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5\r
+       tests=[RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=disabled\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 jJ7uxUR9CAVU for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;\r
+       Thu,  7 Jul 2011 13:58:21 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: from dmz-mailsec-scanner-7.mit.edu (DMZ-MAILSEC-SCANNER-7.MIT.EDU\r
+       [18.7.68.36])\r
+       by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C23D1431FB6\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Thu,  7 Jul 2011 13:58:21 -0700 (PDT)\r
+X-AuditID: 12074424-b7bc6ae000005a77-0c-4e161ded4713\r
+Received: from mailhub-auth-1.mit.edu ( [18.9.21.35])\r
+       by dmz-mailsec-scanner-7.mit.edu (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP\r
+       id EF.B4.23159.DED161E4; Thu,  7 Jul 2011 16:58:21 -0400 (EDT)\r
+Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (OUTGOING-AUTH.MIT.EDU [18.7.22.103])\r
+       by mailhub-auth-1.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.9.2) with ESMTP id p67KwK1g006812; \r
+       Thu, 7 Jul 2011 16:58:20 -0400\r
+Received: from awakening.csail.mit.edu (awakening.csail.mit.edu [18.26.4.91])\r
+       (authenticated bits=0)\r
+       (User authenticated as amdragon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)\r
+       by outgoing.mit.edu (8.13.6/8.12.4) with ESMTP id p67KwIps029306\r
+       (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT);\r
+       Thu, 7 Jul 2011 16:58:19 -0400 (EDT)\r
+Received: from amthrax by awakening.csail.mit.edu with local (Exim 4.72)\r
+       (envelope-from <amdragon@mit.edu>)\r
+       id 1QeveC-0006aU-Ji; Thu, 07 Jul 2011 16:58:08 -0400\r
+Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2011 16:58:08 -0400\r
+From: Austin Clements <amdragon@MIT.EDU>\r
+To: Jameson Graef Rollins <jrollins@finestructure.net>\r
+Subject: Re: Dangerous space bar key (was: Preventing the user shooting\r
+       themself in the foot)\r
+Message-ID: <20110707205808.GF18563@mit.edu>\r
+References: <86iproe86u.fsf@greenrd.plus.com> <877h7xafto.fsf@free.fr>\r
+       <87pqlpioew.fsf@servo.factory.finestructure.net>\r
+       <87wrfwpjdi.fsf@free.fr>\r
+       <CAH-f9Ws6Ji_H3JnkJS1jtio8_-65C_J5iAOnn6XsGp7YSuX2eA@mail.gmail.com>\r
+       <87mxgqgc3k.fsf@free.fr>\r
+       <87d3hlg6ye.fsf@servo.factory.finestructure.net>\r
+MIME-Version: 1.0\r
+Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1\r
+Content-Disposition: inline\r
+Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit\r
+In-Reply-To: <87d3hlg6ye.fsf@servo.factory.finestructure.net>\r
+User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)\r
+X-Brightmail-Tracker:\r
+ H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFtrBKsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUixCmqrPtWVszPYO1SEYs/x2ayWOzZ52Vx\r
+       /eZMZov1U7YxObB43D3N5dG/7jOrx7umbSwez1bdYg5gieKySUnNySxLLdK3S+DKmDHrA1vB\r
+       Qv6KW42NLA2ME3m6GDk5JARMJO5938YEYYtJXLi3nq2LkYtDSGAfo8TJNT9YIZz1jBI/dn1k\r
+       gnBOMEnM+fcdrEVIYAmjxNSDxiA2i4CKxPcTf1hAbDYBDYlt+5czgtgiAmYSPV/+gNnMAhUS\r
+       HzZ9Ye9i5OAQFoiXODC/BMTkFdCRuNafATF+NZNEf28f2BheAUGJkzOfsEC06kjs3HqHDaSe\r
+       WUBaYvk/DoiwvETz1tnMIDangK1E48R37CC2KNA11/a3s01gFJ6FZNIsJJNmIUyahWTSAkaW\r
+       VYyyKblVurmJmTnFqcm6xcmJeXmpRbrmermZJXqpKaWbGEGRwu6isoOx+ZDSIUYBDkYlHt5V\r
+       V0X9hFgTy4orcw8xSnIwKYnyfhYV8xPiS8pPqcxILM6ILyrNSS0+xCjBwawkwvv9MVA5b0pi\r
+       ZVVqUT5MSpqDRUmct9T7v6+QQHpiSWp2ampBahFMVoaDQ0mCVwyYEIQEi1LTUyvSMnNKENJM\r
+       HJwgw3mAhk+UAarhLS5IzC3OTIfIn2LU5ejfPPcIoxBLXn5eqpQ47y6QIgGQoozSPLg5sAT3\r
+       ilEc6C1hXmuQdTzA5Ag36RXQEiagJVyRIB8UlyQipKQaGK0D3BdYm+e9ju7ymeWTHOJ9zot/\r
+       95dNS8qPz+tNrdUL/3AlwS1F37hZ/No3yfe1jsH6FcvKb1xcUH1UmjN05fv2rZuZFc78Phmw\r
+       5czS6fu/MTSFmyzWE3vC1SMpxXV0UU73r5ZDBR8Vd274qF2bf0W3bFnWtvtri0PbVr2u92Y7\r
+       VvqIN+7gciWW4oxEQy3mouJEABqw3DJLAwAA\r
+Cc: Notmuch Mail <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>\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: Thu, 07 Jul 2011 20:58:22 -0000\r
+\r
+Quoth Jameson Graef Rollins on Jul 07 at  1:40 pm:\r
+> On Thu, 07 Jul 2011 20:49:35 +0200, Matthieu Lemerre <racin@free.fr> wrote:\r
+> > On Wed, 6 Jul 2011 09:25:41 -0400, Austin Clements <amdragon@mit.edu> wrote:\r
+> > > * Make SPC mark the *current* message read and move to the next one,\r
+> > > rather than moving to the next and marking it read.  This way, you're\r
+> > > acknowledging the message as read once you've actually read it, rather\r
+> > > than having notmuch mark it read before you've actually read it.\r
+> > \r
+> > I agree. I think it's up to the user to define whether he read the\r
+> > message. In fact as a consequence, I have no use of the 'unread' tag.\r
+> \r
+> I would like to argue very strongly in favor of the current behavior of\r
+> the "unread" tag (since I'm actually the one that designed it).  I want\r
+> the unread flag to always just be handled automatically, being\r
+> automatically removed when I view a message without me having to do\r
+> anything.  If users want to have tags that they manually control, they\r
+> should just define those tags in the new.tags config.\r
+\r
+What I'm suggesting is no more or less automatic than the current\r
+behavior.  It's just a slight tweak to the order in which things\r
+happen: that SPC could remove the unread tag and then move to the next\r
+message, rather than the other way around.  In effect, the read tag\r
+would indicate that you've seen the bottom of the message, not just\r
+the top.\r
+\r
+It's also possible I would have less trouble if SPC didn't\r
+automatically go to the next thread.  The problem I have with the\r
+current behavior is that I often find myself accidentally marking\r
+messages as read because notmuch showed me a message I wasn't\r
+expecting.  This is compounded by the lack of visual feedback when\r
+this happens (e.g., the search results don't update to indicate that\r
+anything has changed, and even if they did, I probably wouldn't notice\r
+that the message *had* been unread).\r