Emacs: how to remove "unread" tag while reading emails

[Jani Nikula]

On Sat, 05 Oct 2013, Austin Clements  wrote:
> One of the problems with the current approach, which most of these
> options share, is that there's no feedback.  For example, when I enter
> a thread, I have no idea if the first message was unread or not.

Agreed. And this gets repeated for navigating messages within the
thread. Very annoying. This should be fixed.

Two other things I find annoying:

* I often find myself glancing at the first few lines of the message to
  decide whether I want to read it now or later (potentially never). I
  still want the unread information be retained if I decide to archive
  or move on to the next thread, so I often end up restoring the unread
  tag. So the marking as read is too eager.

* I sometimes use the arrow keys and page down/up to read through
  messages, and this leaves messages unread even though I've read
  them. So the marking as read is not eager enough.

> I'd like a solution that either naturally doesn't have this problem,
> that visually indicates that a message *was* unread, or that delays
> all unread marking until you leave the thread (possibly combined with
> a visual indication of what will be marked unread).  Bonus points if
> it's easy to adjust what happens, such as saying "keep everything
> unread" or "keep everything unread except this one".

I'd like to have the visual indication.

> To this end, here are my two proposals:
>
> A1) Mark whole thread read when you leave it (via q, X, A or friends)
> and provide a binding to leave a thread without marking it read (C-x k
> would do, but we should provide an explicit one; perhaps C-u prefixing
> other "leave" bindings?  For once, C-u is easy to remember because u
> is the first letter of unread).

I think I'd like to keep this message based instead of thread
based. However it's very difficult to know for sure until one actually
gets to try it.

I do switch between show buffers (for example, while reading a message,
I need to check something from another message) and the marking as read
might get lost. Also, it's not clear to me what happens if you refresh
the buffer and new messages show up in the thread. Again, difficult to
know in advance.


My message based proposal:

Don't do anything when you enter a message. This keeps the unread tag
visible if it's there.

Mark each message as read on actions you do when the point already is
within the message: n/N/p/P/SPC/a/x/A/X/q/r/R/f (others?), arrow keys,
and page up/down, *unless* the action is prefixed with C-u.

Collapsed messages would never be marked as read. RET to expand would
mark as read.

This still does not provide visual indication of the removal of the
unread tag in a way that would be always visible. But I think it's more
important to know whether the message *was* unread before or not.


Here's a proposal independent of the marking-as-read topic that would
help with the visual indication:

We currently set header-line-format (the top header in show view) to the
subject of the first message. The usefulness of the header line could be
improved a lot. We could make it reflect the message the point is
currently on, with user configurable format not unlike
notmuch-search-result-format. Including tags. And this would provide
visual indication for marking as read when the message header is not
visible. The header would also help in navigating long threads with long
messages.

> In either case, I'd like an echo message when I leave the thread
> telling me what happened ("Thread marked as read", "First 3 messages
> marked as read; thread archived", etc.).  These would blend especially
> well with undo, because they would bundle together all read marking
> into a single action that would make sense to undo ("Thread marked as
> read [C-/ to undo]").

This might be useful with the message based approach, although it might
be too verbose, and a new annoyance...


BR,
Jani.

Re: Emacs: how to remove unread tag while reading emails

[Jani Nikula]

On Sat, 05 Oct 2013, Austin Clements amdra...@mit.edu wrote:
 One of the problems with the current approach, which most of these
 options share, is that there's no feedback.  For example, when I enter
 a thread, I have no idea if the first message was unread or not.

Agreed. And this gets repeated for navigating messages within the
thread. Very annoying. This should be fixed.

Two other things I find annoying:

* I often find myself glancing at the first few lines of the message to
  decide whether I want to read it now or later (potentially never). I
  still want the unread information be retained if I decide to archive
  or move on to the next thread, so I often end up restoring the unread
  tag. So the marking as read is too eager.

* I sometimes use the arrow keys and page down/up to read through
  messages, and this leaves messages unread even though I've read
  them. So the marking as read is not eager enough.

 I'd like a solution that either naturally doesn't have this problem,
 that visually indicates that a message *was* unread, or that delays
 all unread marking until you leave the thread (possibly combined with
 a visual indication of what will be marked unread).  Bonus points if
 it's easy to adjust what happens, such as saying keep everything
 unread or keep everything unread except this one.

I'd like to have the visual indication.

 To this end, here are my two proposals:

 A1) Mark whole thread read when you leave it (via q, X, A or friends)
 and provide a binding to leave a thread without marking it read (C-x k
 would do, but we should provide an explicit one; perhaps C-u prefixing
 other leave bindings?  For once, C-u is easy to remember because u
 is the first letter of unread).

I think I'd like to keep this message based instead of thread
based. However it's very difficult to know for sure until one actually
gets to try it.

I do switch between show buffers (for example, while reading a message,
I need to check something from another message) and the marking as read
might get lost. Also, it's not clear to me what happens if you refresh
the buffer and new messages show up in the thread. Again, difficult to
know in advance.


My message based proposal:

Don't do anything when you enter a message. This keeps the unread tag
visible if it's there.

Mark each message as read on actions you do when the point already is
within the message: n/N/p/P/SPC/a/x/A/X/q/r/R/f (others?), arrow keys,
and page up/down, *unless* the action is prefixed with C-u.

Collapsed messages would never be marked as read. RET to expand would
mark as read.

This still does not provide visual indication of the removal of the
unread tag in a way that would be always visible. But I think it's more
important to know whether the message *was* unread before or not.


Here's a proposal independent of the marking-as-read topic that would
help with the visual indication:

We currently set header-line-format (the top header in show view) to the
subject of the first message. The usefulness of the header line could be
improved a lot. We could make it reflect the message the point is
currently on, with user configurable format not unlike
notmuch-search-result-format. Including tags. And this would provide
visual indication for marking as read when the message header is not
visible. The header would also help in navigating long threads with long
messages.

 In either case, I'd like an echo message when I leave the thread
 telling me what happened (Thread marked as read, First 3 messages
 marked as read; thread archived, etc.).  These would blend especially
 well with undo, because they would bundle together all read marking
 into a single action that would make sense to undo (Thread marked as
 read [C-/ to undo]).

This might be useful with the message based approach, although it might
be too verbose, and a new annoyance...


BR,
Jani.
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch

Emacs: how to remove "unread" tag while reading emails

[Mark Walters]

On Sat, 05 Oct 2013, Austin Clements  wrote:
> Great list.
>
> One of the problems with the current approach, which most of these
> options share, is that there's no feedback.  For example, when I enter
> a thread, I have no idea if the first message was unread or not.  I'd
> like a solution that either naturally doesn't have this problem, that
> visually indicates that a message *was* unread, or that delays all
> unread marking until you leave the thread (possibly combined with a
> visual indication of what will be marked unread).  Bonus points if
> it's easy to adjust what happens, such as saying "keep everything
> unread" or "keep everything unread except this one".

I like the idea of not doing the update until you actually leave the
buffer.

> To this end, here are my two proposals:
>
> A1) Mark whole thread read when you leave it (via q, X, A or friends)
> and provide a binding to leave a thread without marking it read (C-x k
> would do, but we should provide an explicit one; perhaps C-u prefixing
> other "leave" bindings?  For once, C-u is easy to remember because u
> is the first letter of unread).
>
> A2) Like A1, but mark only messages up to and containing point when
> you leave a thread.

I like A2 but would like to check exactly what you meant: would this
only mark open messages (ie not collapsed messages) up to point?

I also like the prefix argument for q etc idea but I have a plausible
variation: ctrl-u q (etc) could say "mark 4 messages unread y/N?" so you
could easily see what it would do (but default to not doing it). I am
imagining not updating read/unread as the less common case. I guess if
we provide functions for each case it is easy for a user to configure.

(Actually is it easy for a user to configure how prefix arguments work?)

The only time in my use this would do the wrong thing is if I open all
messages with M-Ret

I think this also simplifies the mark-read code quite substantially
which is nice.

Best wishes

Mark





> In either case, I'd like an echo message when I leave the thread
> telling me what happened ("Thread marked as read", "First 3 messages
> marked as read; thread archived", etc.).  These would blend especially
> well with undo, because they would bundle together all read marking
> into a single action that would make sense to undo ("Thread marked as
> read [C-/ to undo]").

>
> Both options are highly predictable and easy to understand.  They
> don't lose information about which messages were unread when you
> entered a thread.  And they're easy to adjust (you can always -unread
> a message manually and then C-u q or whatever to leave without
> touching anything else).
>
> Quoth Mark Walters on Oct 05 at 10:19 am:
>> 
>> 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. 
>> 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. 
>> 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 

Emacs: how to remove "unread" tag while reading emails

[Austin Clements]

Great list.

One of the problems with the current approach, which most of these
options share, is that there's no feedback.  For example, when I enter
a thread, I have no idea if the first message was unread or not.  I'd
like a solution that either naturally doesn't have this problem, that
visually indicates that a message *was* unread, or that delays all
unread marking until you leave the thread (possibly combined with a
visual indication of what will be marked unread).  Bonus points if
it's easy to adjust what happens, such as saying "keep everything
unread" or "keep everything unread except this one".

To this end, here are my two proposals:

A1) Mark whole thread read when you leave it (via q, X, A or friends)
and provide a binding to leave a thread without marking it read (C-x k
would do, but we should provide an explicit one; perhaps C-u prefixing
other "leave" bindings?  For once, C-u is easy to remember because u
is the first letter of unread).

A2) Like A1, but mark only messages up to and containing point when
you leave a thread.

In either case, I'd like an echo message when I leave the thread
telling me what happened ("Thread marked as read", "First 3 messages
marked as read; thread archived", etc.).  These would blend especially
well with undo, because they would bundle together all read marking
into a single action that would make sense to undo ("Thread marked as
read [C-/ to undo]").

Both options are highly predictable and easy to understand.  They
don't lose information about which messages were unread when you
entered a thread.  And they're easy to adjust (you can always -unread
a message manually and then C-u q or whatever to leave without
touching anything else).

Quoth Mark Walters on Oct 05 at 10:19 am:
> 
> 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. 
> 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. 
> 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?s the rationale to this behaviour?  Am I missing something?  
> >
> > Thanks for your attention, gregor

Emacs: how to remove "unread" tag while reading emails

[Mark Walters]

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. 
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. 
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?s the rationale to this behaviour?  Am I missing something?  
>
> Thanks for your attention, gregor
> ___
> notmuch mailing list
> notmuch at notmuchmail.org
> http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch

Re: Emacs: how to remove unread tag while reading emails

[Mark Walters]

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. 
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. 
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 telegr...@gmx.net 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’s the rationale to this behaviour?  Am I missing something?  

 Thanks for your attention, gregor
 ___
 notmuch mailing list
 notmuch@notmuchmail.org
 http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch

Re: Emacs: how to remove unread tag while reading emails

[Austin Clements]

Great list.

One of the problems with the current approach, which most of these
options share, is that there's no feedback.  For example, when I enter
a thread, I have no idea if the first message was unread or not.  I'd
like a solution that either naturally doesn't have this problem, that
visually indicates that a message *was* unread, or that delays all
unread marking until you leave the thread (possibly combined with a
visual indication of what will be marked unread).  Bonus points if
it's easy to adjust what happens, such as saying keep everything
unread or keep everything unread except this one.

To this end, here are my two proposals:

A1) Mark whole thread read when you leave it (via q, X, A or friends)
and provide a binding to leave a thread without marking it read (C-x k
would do, but we should provide an explicit one; perhaps C-u prefixing
other leave bindings?  For once, C-u is easy to remember because u
is the first letter of unread).

A2) Like A1, but mark only messages up to and containing point when
you leave a thread.

In either case, I'd like an echo message when I leave the thread
telling me what happened (Thread marked as read, First 3 messages
marked as read; thread archived, etc.).  These would blend especially
well with undo, because they would bundle together all read marking
into a single action that would make sense to undo (Thread marked as
read [C-/ to undo]).

Both options are highly predictable and easy to understand.  They
don't lose information about which messages were unread when you
entered a thread.  And they're easy to adjust (you can always -unread
a message manually and then C-u q or whatever to leave without
touching anything else).

Quoth Mark Walters on Oct 05 at 10:19 am:
 
 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. 
 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. 
 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 telegr...@gmx.net 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’s the rationale to this behaviour?  Am I missing something?  
 
  Thanks for your attention, gregor
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch

Re: Emacs: how to remove unread tag while reading emails

[Mark Walters]

On Sat, 05 Oct 2013, Austin Clements amdra...@mit.edu wrote:
 Great list.

 One of the problems with the current approach, which most of these
 options share, is that there's no feedback.  For example, when I enter
 a thread, I have no idea if the first message was unread or not.  I'd
 like a solution that either naturally doesn't have this problem, that
 visually indicates that a message *was* unread, or that delays all
 unread marking until you leave the thread (possibly combined with a
 visual indication of what will be marked unread).  Bonus points if
 it's easy to adjust what happens, such as saying keep everything
 unread or keep everything unread except this one.

I like the idea of not doing the update until you actually leave the
buffer.

 To this end, here are my two proposals:

 A1) Mark whole thread read when you leave it (via q, X, A or friends)
 and provide a binding to leave a thread without marking it read (C-x k
 would do, but we should provide an explicit one; perhaps C-u prefixing
 other leave bindings?  For once, C-u is easy to remember because u
 is the first letter of unread).

 A2) Like A1, but mark only messages up to and containing point when
 you leave a thread.

I like A2 but would like to check exactly what you meant: would this
only mark open messages (ie not collapsed messages) up to point?

I also like the prefix argument for q etc idea but I have a plausible
variation: ctrl-u q (etc) could say mark 4 messages unread y/N? so you
could easily see what it would do (but default to not doing it). I am
imagining not updating read/unread as the less common case. I guess if
we provide functions for each case it is easy for a user to configure.

(Actually is it easy for a user to configure how prefix arguments work?)

The only time in my use this would do the wrong thing is if I open all
messages with M-Ret

I think this also simplifies the mark-read code quite substantially
which is nice.

Best wishes

Mark





 In either case, I'd like an echo message when I leave the thread
 telling me what happened (Thread marked as read, First 3 messages
 marked as read; thread archived, etc.).  These would blend especially
 well with undo, because they would bundle together all read marking
 into a single action that would make sense to undo (Thread marked as
 read [C-/ to undo]).


 Both options are highly predictable and easy to understand.  They
 don't lose information about which messages were unread when you
 entered a thread.  And they're easy to adjust (you can always -unread
 a message manually and then C-u q or whatever to leave without
 touching anything else).

 Quoth Mark Walters on Oct 05 at 10:19 am:
 
 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. 
 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. 
 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 telegr...@gmx.net 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 

Emacs: how to remove "unread" tag while reading emails

[Jonas Hörsch]

On Wed, Sep 18 2013, Gregor Zattler wrote:

> 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?s the rationale to this behaviour?  Am I missing something?  

oftentimes, i start reading my mails from a search on the unread tag and
just quickly enter a message with RET and leave it again pressing
q. with the above suggestion the message would stay marked as unread,
although i saw it.

extra commands like S-SPC and S-a, to bury the buffer after skimming
through the last message in the open thread would remedy the situation
then, though.

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 

Emacs: how to remove "unread" tag while reading emails

[Gregor Zattler]

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?s the rationale to this behaviour?  Am I missing something?  

Thanks for your attention, gregor

Emacs: how to remove unread tag while reading emails

[Gregor Zattler]

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’s the rationale to this behaviour?  Am I missing something?  

Thanks for your attention, gregor
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch