[PATCH v5 00/12] emacs: more flexible and consistent tagging operations

2012-02-28 Thread Pieter Praet
On Mon, 27 Feb 2012 16:50:53 +0200, Tomi Ollila  wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 12:20:31 -0400, David Bremner  
> wrote:
> > On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 00:07:27 +0100, Pieter Praet  
> > wrote:
> > > On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 11:58:32 -0400, David Bremner  
> > > wrote:
> > > > On Sun,  5 Feb 2012 11:13:41 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin  > > > at 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 :( )
>

I share your sentiment.  Also, the function is called `notmuch-show-tag-all',
so having it operate only on open messages would be counterintuitive IMO.

In other words, I think of the prefix arg as being a modifier for the
meaning of 'all'.

But either way, it's fairly trivial to invert its behavior [1].

> So, I prefer '*' operating on all messages in a thread and C-u '*'
> for all open messages in a thread.
> 
> > 
> > d
> 
> Tomi


Peace

-- 
Pieter

[1] id:"87sjhz22vw.fsf at praet.org"


Re: [PATCH v5 00/12] emacs: more flexible and consistent tagging operations

2012-02-28 Thread Pieter Praet
On Mon, 27 Feb 2012 16:50:53 +0200, Tomi Ollila tomi.oll...@iki.fi wrote:
 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 :( )


I share your sentiment.  Also, the function is called `notmuch-show-tag-all',
so having it operate only on open messages would be counterintuitive IMO.

In other words, I think of the prefix arg as being a modifier for the
meaning of 'all'.

But either way, it's fairly trivial to invert its behavior [1].

 So, I prefer '*' operating on all messages in a thread and C-u '*'
 for all open messages in a thread.
 
  
  d
 
 Tomi


Peace

-- 
Pieter

[1] id:87sjhz22vw@praet.org
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch


[PATCH v5 00/12] emacs: more flexible and consistent tagging operations

2012-02-27 Thread Tomi Ollila
On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 12:20:31 -0400, David Bremner  wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 00:07:27 +0100, Pieter Praet  wrote:
> > On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 11:58:32 -0400, David Bremner  
> > wrote:
> > > On Sun,  5 Feb 2012 11:13:41 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin  > > 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


Re: [PATCH v5 00/12] emacs: more flexible and consistent tagging operations

2012-02-27 Thread Tomi Ollila
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


[PATCH v5 00/12] emacs: more flexible and consistent tagging operations

2012-02-25 Thread David Bremner
On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 00:07:27 +0100, Pieter Praet  wrote:
> On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 11:58:32 -0400, David Bremner  
> wrote:
> > On Sun,  5 Feb 2012 11:13:41 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin  > 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.

d


[PATCH v5 00/12] emacs: more flexible and consistent tagging operations

2012-02-25 Thread Pieter Praet
On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 23:38:20 +0100, Pieter Praet  wrote:
> [...]
> Same here.  In v2 [1], '*' tags all and 'C-u *' tags only open.
> 
> One can always swap the keybindings if so inclined.
>

Did I really say that?

There's only a single keybinding, so swap it with *what* ?!?  Itself ?

This should work though:

  #+begin_src emacs-lisp
(define-key notmuch-show-mode-map "*"
  (lambda (prefix  tag-changes)
(interactive
 (cons
  (not current-prefix-arg)
  (notmuch-read-tag-changes nil notmuch-show-thread-id)))
(apply 'notmuch-show-tag-all prefix tag-changes)))
  #+end_src

> [...]


Peace

-- 
Pieter


Re: [PATCH v5 00/12] emacs: more flexible and consistent tagging operations

2012-02-25 Thread David Bremner
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.

d
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch


[PATCH v5 00/12] emacs: more flexible and consistent tagging operations

2012-02-24 Thread Pieter Praet
On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 14:33:35 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin  wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 14:30:29 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin  gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 00:07:27 +0100, Pieter Praet  
> > wrote:
> > > On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 11:58:32 -0400, David Bremner  
> > > wrote:
> > > > On Sun,  5 Feb 2012 11:13:41 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin  > > > at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Changes:
> > > > > 
> > > > > v4:
> > > > > 
> > > > > * rebased on master, no conflicts so no need for another review
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > I pushed this series.  
> > > > 
> > > > Maybe this was discussed already, but I think ideally * would apply only
> > > > to open messages. So consider that a feature request if someone is
> > > > looking for a project.
> > > >
> > > 
> > > 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.
> > > 
> > 
> > I personally do like '*' as is and do not want to change it's behavior.
> > Though I am not against adding a prefix argument for it.
> > 
> 
> Also can you please send new patches (and patch series) in a new
> separate thread?  If they are related to another thread, you can add a
> reference.  But having multiple patch series with multiple versions in a
> single thread is very confusing IMO.
>

Since I've already soiled this thread with my initial series,
I've sent v2 [1] in reply to David's request as well, but will
make sure to start a fresh thread from now on.


> Regards,
>   Dmitry
> 
> > Regards,
> >   Dmitry
> > 
> > > Patches follow.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > d
> > > > ___
> > > > notmuch mailing list
> > > > notmuch at notmuchmail.org
> > > > http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Peace
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > Pieter

Thanks for all your comments!


Peace

-- 
Pieter

[1] id:"1330122640-18895-1-git-send-email-pieter at praet.org"


[PATCH v5 00/12] emacs: more flexible and consistent tagging operations

2012-02-24 Thread Pieter Praet
On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 14:30:29 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin  wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 00:07:27 +0100, Pieter Praet  wrote:
> > On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 11:58:32 -0400, David Bremner  
> > wrote:
> > > On Sun,  5 Feb 2012 11:13:41 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin  > > gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Changes:
> > > > 
> > > > v4:
> > > > 
> > > > * rebased on master, no conflicts so no need for another review
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > I pushed this series.  
> > > 
> > > Maybe this was discussed already, but I think ideally * would apply only
> > > to open messages. So consider that a feature request if someone is
> > > looking for a project.
> > >
> > 
> > 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.
> > 
> 
> I personally do like '*' as is and do not want to change it's behavior.
> Though I am not against adding a prefix argument for it.
>

Same here.  In v2 [1], '*' tags all and 'C-u *' tags only open.

One can always swap the keybindings if so inclined.


> Regards,
>   Dmitry
> 
> > Patches follow.
> > 
> > 
> > > d
> > > ___
> > > notmuch mailing list
> > > notmuch at notmuchmail.org
> > > http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch
> > 
> > 
> > Peace
> > 
> > -- 
> > Pieter
> ___
> notmuch mailing list
> notmuch at notmuchmail.org
> http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch


Peace

-- 
Pieter

[1] id:"1330122640-18895-1-git-send-email-pieter at praet.org"


[PATCH v5 00/12] emacs: more flexible and consistent tagging operations

2012-02-24 Thread Jani Nikula
On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 14:33:35 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin  wrote:
> Also can you please send new patches (and patch series) in a new
> separate thread?  If they are related to another thread, you can add a
> reference.  But having multiple patch series with multiple versions in a
> single thread is very confusing IMO.

IMHO the same thread is okay if the new versions are in-reply-to the
cover letter of the first version.

Jani.


[PATCH v5 00/12] emacs: more flexible and consistent tagging operations

2012-02-24 Thread Dmitry Kurochkin
On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 14:30:29 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin  wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 00:07:27 +0100, Pieter Praet  wrote:
> > On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 11:58:32 -0400, David Bremner  
> > wrote:
> > > On Sun,  5 Feb 2012 11:13:41 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin  > > gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Changes:
> > > > 
> > > > v4:
> > > > 
> > > > * rebased on master, no conflicts so no need for another review
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > I pushed this series.  
> > > 
> > > Maybe this was discussed already, but I think ideally * would apply only
> > > to open messages. So consider that a feature request if someone is
> > > looking for a project.
> > >
> > 
> > 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.
> > 
> 
> I personally do like '*' as is and do not want to change it's behavior.
> Though I am not against adding a prefix argument for it.
> 

Also can you please send new patches (and patch series) in a new
separate thread?  If they are related to another thread, you can add a
reference.  But having multiple patch series with multiple versions in a
single thread is very confusing IMO.

Regards,
  Dmitry

> Regards,
>   Dmitry
> 
> > Patches follow.
> > 
> > 
> > > d
> > > ___
> > > notmuch mailing list
> > > notmuch at notmuchmail.org
> > > http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch
> > 
> > 
> > Peace
> > 
> > -- 
> > Pieter


[PATCH v5 00/12] emacs: more flexible and consistent tagging operations

2012-02-24 Thread Dmitry Kurochkin
On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 00:07:27 +0100, Pieter Praet  wrote:
> On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 11:58:32 -0400, David Bremner  
> wrote:
> > On Sun,  5 Feb 2012 11:13:41 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin  > gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Changes:
> > > 
> > > v4:
> > > 
> > > * rebased on master, no conflicts so no need for another review
> > > 
> > 
> > I pushed this series.  
> > 
> > Maybe this was discussed already, but I think ideally * would apply only
> > to open messages. So consider that a feature request if someone is
> > looking for a project.
> >
> 
> 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.
> 

I personally do like '*' as is and do not want to change it's behavior.
Though I am not against adding a prefix argument for it.

Regards,
  Dmitry

> Patches follow.
> 
> 
> > d
> > ___
> > notmuch mailing list
> > notmuch at notmuchmail.org
> > http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch
> 
> 
> Peace
> 
> -- 
> Pieter


[PATCH v5 00/12] emacs: more flexible and consistent tagging operations

2012-02-24 Thread Pieter Praet
On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 11:58:32 -0400, David Bremner  wrote:
> On Sun,  5 Feb 2012 11:13:41 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin  gmail.com> wrote:
> > Changes:
> > 
> > v4:
> > 
> > * rebased on master, no conflicts so no need for another review
> > 
> 
> I pushed this series.  
> 
> Maybe this was discussed already, but I think ideally * would apply only
> to open messages. So consider that a feature request if someone is
> looking for a project.
>

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.

Patches follow.


> d
> ___
> notmuch mailing list
> notmuch at notmuchmail.org
> http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch


Peace

-- 
Pieter


Re: [PATCH v5 00/12] emacs: more flexible and consistent tagging operations

2012-02-24 Thread Dmitry Kurochkin
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:
   Changes:
   
   v4:
   
   * rebased on master, no conflicts so no need for another review
   
  
  I pushed this series.  
  
  Maybe this was discussed already, but I think ideally * would apply only
  to open messages. So consider that a feature request if someone is
  looking for a project.
 
 
 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.
 

I personally do like '*' as is and do not want to change it's behavior.
Though I am not against adding a prefix argument for it.

Regards,
  Dmitry

 Patches follow.
 
 
  d
  ___
  notmuch mailing list
  notmuch@notmuchmail.org
  http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch
 
 
 Peace
 
 -- 
 Pieter
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch


Re: [PATCH v5 00/12] emacs: more flexible and consistent tagging operations

2012-02-24 Thread Dmitry Kurochkin
On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 14:30:29 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin 
dmitry.kuroch...@gmail.com 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:
Changes:

v4:

* rebased on master, no conflicts so no need for another review

   
   I pushed this series.  
   
   Maybe this was discussed already, but I think ideally * would apply only
   to open messages. So consider that a feature request if someone is
   looking for a project.
  
  
  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.
  
 
 I personally do like '*' as is and do not want to change it's behavior.
 Though I am not against adding a prefix argument for it.
 

Also can you please send new patches (and patch series) in a new
separate thread?  If they are related to another thread, you can add a
reference.  But having multiple patch series with multiple versions in a
single thread is very confusing IMO.

Regards,
  Dmitry

 Regards,
   Dmitry
 
  Patches follow.
  
  
   d
   ___
   notmuch mailing list
   notmuch@notmuchmail.org
   http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch
  
  
  Peace
  
  -- 
  Pieter
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch


Re: [PATCH v5 00/12] emacs: more flexible and consistent tagging operations

2012-02-24 Thread Jani Nikula
On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 14:33:35 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin 
dmitry.kuroch...@gmail.com wrote:
 Also can you please send new patches (and patch series) in a new
 separate thread?  If they are related to another thread, you can add a
 reference.  But having multiple patch series with multiple versions in a
 single thread is very confusing IMO.

IMHO the same thread is okay if the new versions are in-reply-to the
cover letter of the first version.

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


Re: [PATCH v5 00/12] emacs: more flexible and consistent tagging operations

2012-02-24 Thread Pieter Praet
On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 14:30:29 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin 
dmitry.kuroch...@gmail.com 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:
Changes:

v4:

* rebased on master, no conflicts so no need for another review

   
   I pushed this series.  
   
   Maybe this was discussed already, but I think ideally * would apply only
   to open messages. So consider that a feature request if someone is
   looking for a project.
  
  
  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.
  
 
 I personally do like '*' as is and do not want to change it's behavior.
 Though I am not against adding a prefix argument for it.


Same here.  In v2 [1], '*' tags all and 'C-u *' tags only open.

One can always swap the keybindings if so inclined.


 Regards,
   Dmitry
 
  Patches follow.
  
  
   d
   ___
   notmuch mailing list
   notmuch@notmuchmail.org
   http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch
  
  
  Peace
  
  -- 
  Pieter
 ___
 notmuch mailing list
 notmuch@notmuchmail.org
 http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch


Peace

-- 
Pieter

[1] id:1330122640-18895-1-git-send-email-pie...@praet.org
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch


Re: [PATCH v5 00/12] emacs: more flexible and consistent tagging operations

2012-02-24 Thread Pieter Praet
On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 14:33:35 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin 
dmitry.kuroch...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 14:30:29 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin 
 dmitry.kuroch...@gmail.com 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:
 Changes:
 
 v4:
 
 * rebased on master, no conflicts so no need for another review
 

I pushed this series.  

Maybe this was discussed already, but I think ideally * would apply only
to open messages. So consider that a feature request if someone is
looking for a project.
   
   
   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.
   
  
  I personally do like '*' as is and do not want to change it's behavior.
  Though I am not against adding a prefix argument for it.
  
 
 Also can you please send new patches (and patch series) in a new
 separate thread?  If they are related to another thread, you can add a
 reference.  But having multiple patch series with multiple versions in a
 single thread is very confusing IMO.


Since I've already soiled this thread with my initial series,
I've sent v2 [1] in reply to David's request as well, but will
make sure to start a fresh thread from now on.


 Regards,
   Dmitry
 
  Regards,
Dmitry
  
   Patches follow.
   
   
d
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch
   
   
   Peace
   
   -- 
   Pieter

Thanks for all your comments!


Peace

-- 
Pieter

[1] id:1330122640-18895-1-git-send-email-pie...@praet.org
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch


Re: [PATCH v5 00/12] emacs: more flexible and consistent tagging operations

2012-02-24 Thread Pieter Praet
On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 23:38:20 +0100, Pieter Praet pie...@praet.org wrote:
 [...]
 Same here.  In v2 [1], '*' tags all and 'C-u *' tags only open.
 
 One can always swap the keybindings if so inclined.


Did I really say that?

There's only a single keybinding, so swap it with *what* ?!?  Itself ?

This should work though:

  #+begin_src emacs-lisp
(define-key notmuch-show-mode-map *
  (lambda (prefix rest tag-changes)
(interactive
 (cons
  (not current-prefix-arg)
  (notmuch-read-tag-changes nil notmuch-show-thread-id)))
(apply 'notmuch-show-tag-all prefix tag-changes)))
  #+end_src

 [...]


Peace

-- 
Pieter
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch


Re: [PATCH v5 00/12] emacs: more flexible and consistent tagging operations

2012-02-23 Thread Pieter Praet
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:
  Changes:
  
  v4:
  
  * rebased on master, no conflicts so no need for another review
  
 
 I pushed this series.  
 
 Maybe this was discussed already, but I think ideally * would apply only
 to open messages. So consider that a feature request if someone is
 looking for a project.


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.

Patches follow.


 d
 ___
 notmuch mailing list
 notmuch@notmuchmail.org
 http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch


Peace

-- 
Pieter
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch


[PATCH v5 00/12] emacs: more flexible and consistent tagging operations

2012-02-08 Thread David Bremner
On Sun,  5 Feb 2012 11:13:41 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin  wrote:
> Changes:
> 
> v4:
> 
> * rebased on master, no conflicts so no need for another review
> 

I pushed this series.  

Maybe this was discussed already, but I think ideally * would apply only
to open messages. So consider that a feature request if someone is
looking for a project.

d


Re: [PATCH v5 00/12] emacs: more flexible and consistent tagging operations

2012-02-08 Thread David Bremner
On Sun,  5 Feb 2012 11:13:41 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin 
dmitry.kuroch...@gmail.com wrote:
 Changes:
 
 v4:
 
 * rebased on master, no conflicts so no need for another review
 

I pushed this series.  

Maybe this was discussed already, but I think ideally * would apply only
to open messages. So consider that a feature request if someone is
looking for a project.

d
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch


[PATCH v5 00/12] emacs: more flexible and consistent tagging operations

2012-02-05 Thread Dmitry Kurochkin
Changes:

v4:

* rebased on master, no conflicts so no need for another review

v4:

* rebased on master after Jameson's archiving changes

v3:

* merged 3 `notmuch-show-tag-all'-related patches into one

* add patch to clean up tagging function argument names

* fix other comments from Austin's reviews [5,6]

v2:

* add patch to remove "No tags given" error from `notmuch-tag' as
  suggested by Austin in [1]

* split patch 3 in two (search and show) for easier review

* add patch with NEWS entry

* rename `notmuch-{search,show}-operate-all' to
  `notmuch-{search,show}-tag-all'

* fix other comments from Austin's reviews [2,3,4]

Regards,
  Dmitry

[1] id:"20120129231650.GK17991 at mit.edu"
[2] id:"20120129225710.GG17991 at mit.edu"
[3] id:"20120129230229.GI17991 at mit.edu"
[4] id:"20120129231120.GJ17991 at mit.edu"
[5] id:"20120130044806.GM17991 at mit.edu"
[6] id:"20120130050402.GP17991 at mit.edu"



[PATCH v5 00/12] emacs: more flexible and consistent tagging operations

2012-02-04 Thread Dmitry Kurochkin
Changes:

v4:

* rebased on master, no conflicts so no need for another review

v4:

* rebased on master after Jameson's archiving changes

v3:

* merged 3 `notmuch-show-tag-all'-related patches into one

* add patch to clean up tagging function argument names

* fix other comments from Austin's reviews [5,6]

v2:

* add patch to remove No tags given error from `notmuch-tag' as
  suggested by Austin in [1]

* split patch 3 in two (search and show) for easier review

* add patch with NEWS entry

* rename `notmuch-{search,show}-operate-all' to
  `notmuch-{search,show}-tag-all'

* fix other comments from Austin's reviews [2,3,4]

Regards,
  Dmitry

[1] id:20120129231650.gk17...@mit.edu
[2] id:20120129225710.gg17...@mit.edu
[3] id:20120129230229.gi17...@mit.edu
[4] id:20120129231120.gj17...@mit.edu
[5] id:20120130044806.gm17...@mit.edu
[6] id:20120130050402.gp17...@mit.edu

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