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 103426DE136E for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 07:19:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at cworth.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.302 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.302 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.352, DKIMWL_WL_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.652, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=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 YKg17D33njmV for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 07:19:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wr1-f48.google.com (mail-wr1-f48.google.com [209.85.221.48]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 177906DE1333 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 07:19:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wr1-f48.google.com with SMTP id y13so3204151wrd.3 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 07:19:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=dme-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=to:subject:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=i9teRv4ubdtJvzkJHDTG9quFcqpxtX0HDxhzQEou8eg=; b=NV/cdVTVPNB6xhwhuSAAEnuY11yUwjB8GOcbF2Y784TO74sjl5btyt93a67YTFBlUJ x4gefo+aCyLofhqUQUx3FhfZfoghzix3E9h7B6lGfw589Chk28JKWJJb8ZmqDpq/Br2G VEasB3dcBXK6GdFlj6bJinrK58vlU2N4JYsIPbwjlVSyew3hB8xLACHkp88yMJfXJjPE X17XoubsRiFP978uWfjTVSTK7mkBBHLTD3Jfr2Tk38VzjppL07BsznOvvDihJo2f6hCx wlta3VVEIJvM0uTAW0K1e5OKiPWOQS4+1RWyvId1tE+p8DrGyVWOKTqkGHI5o9UUXcwF ktVg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:to:subject:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:mime-version; bh=i9teRv4ubdtJvzkJHDTG9quFcqpxtX0HDxhzQEou8eg=; b=IODo0g0jZxEEEhVT+G+UeBwhVIrBLxYuCVBcb7Al1sDhNcfapcbVP4OPHIagXXeN87 NlT2r2HAa4qMEgG0lTY0FTcNfTWUSKkSlAArQAO479ypq7rLuL6hLlt8/2c0W1CJKX1A yXvHEZ68OjLe5EwvB+3bUVNegpDqlvzjuio3QNoJjrtavgTw6EqqdwQ4m5P1WW0TAreS 89VFWxStR7Z/3U6tm9VAtCVEFiRxlpQUGYR2jLL/NcsZgAYjI9n/cvfTchu6F5RrqUQ2 iZTeFSbccJxfTwyeM7bWHOeDXhPY7xIueLKPDpu1Ly2h3UAW13B/dCHgXbIn22MEiBYv 9BNA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUcONIzJm5c4To/66E/mLt/GjpCFvo02dHPZWvBlvTe09RfcfWD /eXrR4fjVV/pX3R51TZ0aXPCNw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxbdnzA7qYfaI51009YUuj+bvj8D1QJk29OK04FKwu4W+PqlQyaEU/YszRR8E48RlnM2hUyqg== X-Received: by 2002:adf:e692:: with SMTP id r18mr23748400wrm.231.1554905949338; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 07:19:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from disaster-area.hh.sledj.net (disaster-area.hh.sledj.net. [81.149.164.25]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f1sm1792022wml.28.2019.04.10.07.19.07 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 10 Apr 2019 07:19:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (disaster-area.hh.sledj.net [local]) by disaster-area.hh.sledj.net (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPA id 768fadd5; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 14:19:06 +0000 (UTC) To: Pierre Neidhardt , notmuch@notmuchmail.org Subject: Re: Reply inline in notmuch-show buffer, "mu4e-conversation style" In-Reply-To: <87pnpu9ej1.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> References: <877ecvb0q7.fsf@bababa.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> <877ecvm05y.fsf@bababa.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> <87tvffqwp0.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> <87a7gyb06w.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> <87v9zm9ix2.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> <87pnpu9ej1.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> X-HGTTG: heart-of-gold From: David Edmondson Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 15:19:06 +0100 Message-ID: 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." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 14:19:12 -0000 On Wednesday, 2019-04-10 at 15:27:14 +02, Pierre Neidhardt wrote: > David Edmondson writes: > >> Yes. My argument was not that we shouldn't have this, just that I wonder >> if it results in a good workflow for people who are not using >> notmuch/mu4e/gmail (or any other client that shares the same kind of >> thread view). > > With about 1 year of experience using mu4e-conversation, I found that it > works really well, actually better in most cases since it does not > "pollute" emails with forgotten citations. Encouraging people to trim their replies is an ongoing burden, I agree. > Most people use Gmail or clients that support threading, in which case > this is really a good fit. 90% of my email is via my employer. There is no Gmail there, and most people are not using a threaded mailer. In general they are used to inter-mingling their comments in replies rather than top-posting or not quoting (but this is definitely changing over time, with top-posting becoming more common). > But really if we think about the workflow of "most people", then most of > the time citations are ignored (e.g. top-posting) and just pollute the > rest of the emails. In those cases (the majority?) a non-threaded > workflow does not really work I think. I've no problem with their being more options. dme. -- Stranded starfish have no place to hide.