On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 23:07:02 -0800, Jameson Graef Rollins <jrollins@finestructure.net> wrote:
> Sorry to be so late on this, but I'm not a big fan of this new feature.
> I would prefer to always see the subject (or any other field for that
> matter) as is.

The Emacs UI always replaced blank subjects with '[No Subject]' in
buffer names. The printing code also needed something other than a blank
subject for buffer renaming.

> As a principle I would prefer there not be text replacements unless it's
> very clear that text has been replaced.  Buttons work because it's clear
> they're buttons.  This is not the case here, though, since this text
> replacement could actually be confused with real text.
> 
> It's also not clear to me why this feature would be needed.  I have
> never found blank subjects confusing.  The field is always clearly
> delineated, at least in search and show mode.  If it's not clear
> elsewhere, maybe we can make the delineation of the subject field
> clearer, but leave the actual subject text string alone.
> 
> If some feel this feature is really needed we should at least have a
> customization variable.  notmuch-unblank-subject?  I don't have any good
> name suggestions, though.

Updating `notmuch-prettify-subject' to use a user configurable string
(that can be set to the empty string) sounds like a good idea. Please
ensure that the various other bits of code that require something other
than a blank subject still work properly.