From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <tom.hirschowitz@univ-smb.fr>
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F8D06DE0B36
 for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Fri,  6 Mar 2020 02:51:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at cworth.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.179
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.179 tagged_above=-999 required=5
 tests=[AWL=-0.664, RCVD_HELO_IP_MISMATCH=1.186,
 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled
Received: from arlo.cworth.org ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (arlo.cworth.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with ESMTP id 6GvvPuf5hWmi for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;
 Fri,  6 Mar 2020 02:51:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Greylist: delayed 572 seconds by postgrey-1.36 at arlo;
 Fri, 06 Mar 2020 02:51:35 PST
Received: from smtpout02-ext3.partage.renater.fr
 (smtpout02-ext3.partage.renater.fr [194.254.241.34])
 by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00FA56DE0946
 for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Fri,  6 Mar 2020 02:51:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from zmtaauth02.partage.renater.fr (zmtaauth02.partage.renater.fr
 [194.254.241.25])
 by smtpout20.partage.renater.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E0C7BFF47
 for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Fri,  6 Mar 2020 11:41:59 +0100 (CET)
Received: from zmtaauth02.partage.renater.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by zmtaauth02.partage.renater.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9850BA00EB
 for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Fri,  6 Mar 2020 11:41:59 +0100 (CET)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by zmtaauth02.partage.renater.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 873AAA00E0
 for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Fri,  6 Mar 2020 11:41:59 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at zmtaauth02.partage.renater.fr
Received: from zmtaauth02.partage.renater.fr ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (zmtaauth02.partage.renater.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new,
 port 10026) with ESMTP id i8Gb8rXri2Hu for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;
 Fri,  6 Mar 2020 11:41:59 +0100 (CET)
Received: from 193.48.127.14 (unknown [194.254.241.251])
 by zmtaauth02.partage.renater.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 4AA20A0193
 for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Fri,  6 Mar 2020 11:41:59 +0100 (CET)
From: Tom Hirschowitz <tom.hirschowitz@univ-smb.fr>
To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org
Cc: 
Subject: oldest-first
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2020 11:41:58 +0100
Message-ID: <87ftelzrwp.fsf@hirscho.lama.univ-savoie.fr>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system."
 <notmuch.notmuchmail.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://notmuchmail.org/mailman/options/notmuch>,
 <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/>
List-Post: <mailto:notmuch@notmuchmail.org>
List-Help: <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch>,
 <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2020 10:51:38 -0000


Hi all,

The order returned by notmuch with the oldest-first option looks wrong
to me: as far as I can see, threads are sorted according to their oldest
unread message, but in any case, it is not the converse of the
newest-first ordering.

Is this a bug? And if not, how hard would it be to add an option for
getting the converse of newest-first?

Thanks in advance for any help!
Tom