> After a discussion on IRC, my understanding is the following. The > underlying behaviour that Leo is objecting to is that if any one file > with a given message-id has the ,S maildir flag, then when notmuch syncs > maildir flags to tags, it will remove the unread tag from that > message-id. After some back and forth and thinking about it, I think > notmuch's current behaviour is actually correct (given the constraint > that tags attach to message-ids). You could argue for different ways of > resolving conflicts for maildir flags in general, but the ",S" or "seen" > flag has fairly natural common sense semantics. I can confirm this is my issue. My thinking is that if any file does not have the ,S maildir flag, then I would prefer the mail to be marked as unread, as a read mail that is spuriously marked as unread is a small inconvenience, while an unread mail that is spuriously marked as read can have huge consequences. Actually, I just noticed while writing this mail that I had setup a sieve filter for duplicate email that put them in a “Duplicate” folder and automatically marks them as “read”, so that at the same time they wouldn't bother me in the thunderbird interface but I could still check dovecot's duplicate detection didn't have false positives. This behaviour of notmuch thus made me miss 9 emails in the 2 weeks I've been using it, the oldest being 12 days ago, without any warning. Well, now I know about it and can try to change my setup (except I can't really touch this sieve filter as other people rely on it), but… If this is a willing choice, I'd be glad were it revisited :) _______________________________________________ notmuch mailing list notmuch@notmuchmail.org https://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch