On Wed, 09 Jun 2010 16:12:54 +0100, David Edmondson <dme@dme.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Jun 2010 10:49:43 -0400, Jameson Rollins <jrollins@finestructure.net> wrote:
> > The function to advance through threads with the space bar is useful.
> > However, the current implementation also archives messages.  The idea
> > of archiving a message should not be intertwined with the processes of
> > advancing through messages to read them.  Archiving in general should
> > be a separate operation that one does explicitly.  This patch just
> > renames the advance function "notmuch-show-advance", and removes the
> > archiving of a thread when the end of the thread is reached.
> 
> This is great, but what if I want the current behaviour?

Well, you could do like I do now, and write a function that does what
you want and bind it to whatever key you want.  But I really don't think
the current behavior should be the default.  The current behavior
completely mixes the meaning of "unread" and "inbox".  If there is no
difference between the meaning of those tags, then why have separate
tags for them?

I think we've done some good work in making the "unread" tag correspond
reasonably well to actually viewing a message.  We have lots of good
automatic removal of that tag when messages are viewed.  But I really
feel strongly that "unread" is the *only* tag that we should be handling
in an automated way like that.  We should really leave it to the user to
handle all other tags explicitly how they see fit.  I certainly don't
want every message I read automatically removed from my inbox.

If you feel really strongly about this in the other direction, I would
like to understand why.  If we can't resolve, then maybe a vote?

jamie.