On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 12:20:31 -0400, David Bremner <da...@tethera.net> wrote: > On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 00:07:27 +0100, Pieter Praet <pie...@praet.org> wrote: > > On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 11:58:32 -0400, David Bremner <da...@tethera.net> wrote: > > > On Sun, 5 Feb 2012 11:13:41 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin > > > <dmitry.kuroch...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > How about if '*' applies to all messages (as it currently does), > > but 'C-u *' only to open messages? That would make more sense IMHO. > > > > But, conforming to your original request, I've implemented the inverse. > > > > Thanks for implementing that. I could live with either way. Do other > people have opinions on this? My reasoning is if you descend into a > thread from some search page, it seems likely that you want to operate > on the messages matching the search.
I've pretty soon lost the original open/close status as I often navigate through messages by opening/closing messages, so for me not operating on all messages in thread is magic behaviour. In case I'd use C-u * I first have to check through the full thread what are the actual messages currently open (lots of screen scrolling :( ) So, I prefer '*' operating on all messages in a thread and C-u '*' for all open messages in a thread. > > d Tomi _______________________________________________ notmuch mailing list notmuch@notmuchmail.org http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch