From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0375B431FC7 for ; Sun, 1 Sep 2013 18:22:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[none] autolearn=disabled Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hN9Rqj6hbOaV for ; Sun, 1 Sep 2013 18:22:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from yantan.tethera.net (yantan.tethera.net [199.188.72.155]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 45D01431FC3 for ; Sun, 1 Sep 2013 18:22:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from remotemail by yantan.tethera.net with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1VGIq9-00067A-Rt; Sun, 01 Sep 2013 22:22:01 -0300 Received: (nullmailer pid 2277 invoked by uid 1000); Mon, 02 Sep 2013 01:21:45 -0000 From: David Bremner To: Mark Walters , notmuch@notmuchmail.org Subject: Re: [Patch v4 0/3] Add some thread based actions to pick In-Reply-To: <1377460534-6022-1-git-send-email-markwalters1009@gmail.com> References: <1377460534-6022-1-git-send-email-markwalters1009@gmail.com> User-Agent: Notmuch/0.16+37~g9701e9c (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.3.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Date: Sun, 01 Sep 2013 22:21:45 -0300 Message-ID: <877gf0t3va.fsf@zancas.localnet> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Sep 2013 01:22:12 -0000 Mark Walters writes: > This is a rebased version of id:1371195472-441-1-git-send-email-markwalters1009@gmail.com > > The only other change is a new patch 3 adding previous/next thread > commands: they are both very simple functions based on the first two > patches. > These look OK to me. I am a bit skeptical about the binding '*' here. I guess at least it will not cause more havoc than people are expecting. d