From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 174286DE0317 for ; Sun, 10 Apr 2016 19:05:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at cworth.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.018 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.018 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.007, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 aaF2WTAF0k5Z for ; Sun, 10 Apr 2016 19:05:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fethera.tethera.net (fethera.tethera.net [198.245.60.197]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 45B006DE02DD for ; Sun, 10 Apr 2016 19:05:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from remotemail by fethera.tethera.net with local (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1apREe-0003LR-Lb; Sun, 10 Apr 2016 22:05:52 -0400 Received: (nullmailer pid 28974 invoked by uid 1000); Mon, 11 Apr 2016 02:05:41 -0000 From: David Bremner To: Mark Walters , Daniel Kahn Gillmor , David Mazieres expires 2016-07-03 PDT , notmuch@notmuchmail.org Subject: Re: Breaking a really long thread In-Reply-To: <87bn5ijthh.fsf@qmul.ac.uk> References: <87k2kd8r6d.fsf@qmul.ac.uk> <87wpoc7hf8.fsf@ta.scs.stanford.edu> <8760vrm3jk.fsf@alice.fifthhorseman.net> <87fuuu3938.fsf@zancas.localnet> <87bn5ijthh.fsf@qmul.ac.uk> User-Agent: Notmuch/0.21+99~gd93d377 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.5.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2016 23:05:41 -0300 Message-ID: <87oa9g7vd6.fsf@zancas.localnet> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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, 11 Apr 2016 02:05:56 -0000 Mark Walters writes: > I think we already have this, except it is called > notmuch-mua-hidden-headers. It defaults to '("^User-Agent:"). > > I think it would be reasonable to add In-Reply-To to this list. > > However, if I read the code correctly, currently we are changing > message-hidden-headers globally which doesn't feel the right thing to > do. Probably we should do something more like you suggest, and do the > overriding just in notmuch-message-mode. > Summarizing, I see 3 related changes here - fixing the code to let-bind message-hidden-headers instead of globally modify it - adding in-reply-to notmuch-mua - providing a keybinding to toggle visibility of hidden headers that works better than the current use of widen d