On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 17:18:30 -0400, Jesse Rosenthal <jrosenthal at jhu.edu> wrote: > Which is all just to say that I think that archiving is just a special > case of tagging/untagging, and that the issues raised here should be > considered across the larger general case.
I do agree that archiving is just a special-case of tagging/untagging. And fortunately, I think the implementation matches that, so consistency will be natural here. You're also making the claim that the tagging behavior should be consistent between the search-results and thread-content views and that makes a lot of sense. Earlier in your message, you wrote: > However, when I have a long thread, and only one message in the inbox, > tagging the thread, of course, tags all the messages in it "to-reply." > Now, the way to do it might be to just change my habits, and only tag > while in show-mode, as opposed to search-mode. But this does seem to be > in conflict with the way I intuitively want to handle my mail, and I > imagine I'm not the only one. It's funny, because for a while we did have the tag operation in the search view affecting only the messages that actually matched the search. The problem we ran into was that if you archived a message from the search view and then wanted to undo that, the "+ inbox" operation would not work, (since archiving the messages made them no longer match the current search). We "fixed" that by making the tag operations affect all messages in the thread. It occurs to me that the real bug here is that the tag operation is re-executing the search, rather than simply acting on the set of messages being displayed. And that's a bug we've recently discussed and want to fix. Once we fix that, I think we can go back to having tag operations only affect matched messages in the search view, and I agree that this will be extremely convenient. -Carl -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/attachments/20100417/bd8d47b8/attachment.pgp>