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 55F84431FB6 for ; Fri, 13 Apr 2012 01:57:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.7 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] 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 kdt5FEiEyCpu for ; Fri, 13 Apr 2012 01:57:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qc0-f181.google.com (mail-qc0-f181.google.com [209.85.216.181]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 61099431FAF for ; Fri, 13 Apr 2012 01:57:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: by qcsk26 with SMTP id k26so2175663qcs.26 for ; Fri, 13 Apr 2012 01:57:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:subject:in-reply-to:references:user-agent:date:message-id :mime-version:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=EPCqCdRwv6ONOLnxfrOlgQ/S8pln126MvQWsBjWvc9Q=; b=mkTzfqFtMF2WCC5ceiNiO8Brd4uSORocmsMlMaNIG7jGKmTtwlXLIuc8PhDCvANxUb Gf2nOxQwn1obuDc/IJly+SIH7JjRjqJ73m+JDs3nqEhgfppfPtMhi+HwbbUwIBBcKdob G6+AhFcosqAsD0HoItdbhln03y4SRE+DO1xvOcwTHtDFMrPsGIP2E+YHlJP6mQKBTc6D jbM6OsAjeJ93T1qVgxG9ZolFRcihmEDRby2CAzMFE6QYM03J1uaqtZiK7LjQIL/f8s+/ iGSXWbEFum68ikDpmbT977CMykjnK0SynK7gtI2xf+OexbR19SpGkpihZS3ahypUNKpD Aapw== Received: by 10.224.173.194 with SMTP id q2mr1417250qaz.15.1334307439702; Fri, 13 Apr 2012 01:57:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([92.243.24.172]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id dx8sm7609556qab.5.2012.04.13.01.57.17 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 13 Apr 2012 01:57:18 -0700 (PDT) From: Jani Nikula To: Tomi Ollila , Jameson Graef Rollins , Mark Walters , notmuch@notmuchmail.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] emacs-show: open excluded matches if no other matches In-Reply-To: References: <1331836090-30560-1-git-send-email-markwalters1009@gmail.com> <8762d44vkv.fsf@servo.finestructure.net> User-Agent: Notmuch/0.11.1+222~ga47a98c (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.1.1 (i686-pc-linux-gnu) Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 08:57:13 +0000 Message-ID: <87k41kj9g6.fsf@nikula.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlVg+oxqlKs58VOkXs1uSll2xlmqNuQ8QW0dqluGDElhagBnVb/mhIYGnGq70N00rThP+yT 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: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 08:57:22 -0000 On Thu, 12 Apr 2012 22:20:52 +0300, Tomi Ollila wrote: > On Thu, Apr 12 2012, Jameson Graef Rollins wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 15 2012, Mark Walters wrote: > >> Currently emacs show does not open matching but excluded > >> messages. This is normally the desired behaviour but is probably not > >> ideal if only excluded messages match. This patch opens all the > >> matching (necessarily excluded) messages in this case and goes to the > >> first one. > > > > Hi, Mark. I have tested this patch and it LGTM. I think this is the > > behavior we want, since it's no fun to open up a show buffer and have > > all messages in the thread closed. That doesn't make much sense. > > I disagree: If I open up a show buffer I'd like to have all messages > in the thread closed if search terms do not match. But that is my > opinion and inconsistent with current behaviour. > > (Therefore I already +1:d this patch) > > An example: I have thread of 100 messages and 1 of those is unread. > Search terms is tag:unread. I enter the thread: 99 messages closed > and this one open. Now unread is automatically removed. If I go back > to search view (by pressing q) and re-choose the same thread, > current behaviour is to open all 100 messages. I'd like to see all > 100 messages closed. IIUC this would still show all messages closed. Messages that don't match will be closed. The change is that if there are messages that match, but all of them are excluded, then open the messages anyway. In your example, only if you have *another* message that is both tag:unread and tag:deleted (or some other excluded tag) it would show up the second time you enter show view. I actually think I'd still want the above to show all messages closed, unless the excluded tag was explicitly specified in the search. The idea of exclusions is to reduce "noise" in the view, why open them? If you have those 100 messages in a thread, and you want to see the interesting (i.e. non-excluded) messages, I'd rather see 0 open if 0 are interesting, instead of 100 non-interesting if they are all excluded. Perhaps a function to toggle the open/close of excluded messages would be a better idea. But then I don't use exclusions ATM, so maybe I just don't understand, and won't be affected either way. *shrug*. BR, Jani.