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 ED191431FBD for ; Sat, 5 Oct 2013 02:20:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=1.2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] 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 Zv9BT7C3h++J for ; Sat, 5 Oct 2013 02:20:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail2.qmul.ac.uk (mail2.qmul.ac.uk [138.37.6.6]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 40B9A431FAF for ; Sat, 5 Oct 2013 02:20:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.qmul.ac.uk ([138.37.6.40]) by mail2.qmul.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VSO1p-00056f-Dd; Sat, 05 Oct 2013 10:20:03 +0100 Received: from 93-97-24-31.zone5.bethere.co.uk ([93.97.24.31] helo=localhost) by smtp.qmul.ac.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VSO1p-0004uR-4o; Sat, 05 Oct 2013 10:20:01 +0100 From: Mark Walters To: Gregor Zattler , notmuch@notmuchmail.org Subject: Re: Emacs: how to remove "unread" tag while reading emails In-Reply-To: <87hadi0xse.fsf@boo.workgroup> References: <87hadi0xse.fsf@boo.workgroup> User-Agent: Notmuch/0.16 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.4.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Date: Sat, 05 Oct 2013 10:19:59 +0100 Message-ID: <87pprk3whs.fsf@qmul.ac.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Sender-Host-Address: 93.97.24.31 X-QM-SPAM-Info: Sender has good ham record. :) X-QM-Body-MD5: 0132fe92fad72818b3ea93df44df63ea (of first 20000 bytes) X-SpamAssassin-Score: 0.0 X-SpamAssassin-SpamBar: / X-SpamAssassin-Report: The QM spam filters have analysed this message to determine if it is spam. We require at least 5.0 points to mark a message as spam. This message scored 0.0 points. Summary of the scoring: * 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider * (markwalters1009[at]gmail.com) * 0.0 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list X-QM-Scan-Virus: ClamAV says the message is clean 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: Sat, 05 Oct 2013 09:20:17 -0000 Hello I agree that the unread tag does not work well. There are some instances which I would class as plain bugs (notmuch-show-next-message which is bound to N marks the new message read even if it is collapsed) and other instances where it is not clear what the correct behaviour should be. I have messed around a bit and there seem to be a lot of possible variants and I don't know whether any would have any consensus. One clear divide is whether we should only mark "visited messages" (ie ones reached using space, n,N,p,P etc in the current bindings) or we should also make messages seen by scrolling past (eg with page down). Anyway here is a list of some possibilities. In all cases I assume we do not mark any collapsed message read. 1) Mark a message read when we visit it. 2) Mark a message read when we visit it and the leave it with a "visit move" (eg n for next message) 3) Mark a message read if we see the start of the message in the buffer.=20 4) Mark a message read if we have seen the start and end of the message in the buffer. 5) Mark a message read if we see the end of the message after seeing the start (rationale moving to the top of the buffer is likely "movement" rather than "reading") 6) Something based on how we leave the message: eg page down could mark all messages which were fully visible read, n (next-open message) could mark the message being left read.=20 7) Similar to 6) but something where read necessarily includes have seen the start of the message. I think all of these are reasonably easy to implement, and I think I know which I would like (something like 5 or 7) but it would be interesting to know if there is any general view or any view on how customisable this should be. Does anyone have any thoughts? Best wishes Mark On Wed, 18 Sep 2013, Gregor Zattler wrote: > Dear notmuchers, > > I had difficulties to reliably remove the "unread" tag from > messages. Mostly I page through threads with the space bar and > all is well. But when the beginning of the thread is already > collapsed and I "jump" in the middle of a message pressing space > bar does not remove the unread tag. It's only removed when > *entering* the message via space bar from the previous message. > So the last press on space bar in the previous message jumps to > the next message and at the same time removes its unread tag. > > This seems strange to me. I would say the unread tag should be > removed when leaving the message with the last press on space > bar, indicating that one really paged trough the whole message > instead of only seeing the very beginning of it. > > What=E2=80=99s the rationale to this behaviour? Am I missing something?= =20=20 > > Thanks for your attention, gregor > _______________________________________________ > notmuch mailing list > notmuch@notmuchmail.org > http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch