On Mon, Apr 11 2016, Mark Walters wrote: > On Mon, 11 Apr 2016, David Bremner <david@tethera.net> wrote: >> Mark Walters <markwalters1009@gmail.com> writes: >> >>> I think we already have this, except it is called >>> notmuch-mua-hidden-headers. It defaults to '("^User-Agent:"). >>> >>> I think it would be reasonable to add In-Reply-To to this list. >>> >>> However, if I read the code correctly, currently we are changing >>> message-hidden-headers globally which doesn't feel the right thing to >>> do. Probably we should do something more like you suggest, and do the >>> overriding just in notmuch-message-mode. >>> >> >> Summarizing, I see 3 related changes here >> >> - fixing the code to let-bind message-hidden-headers instead of globally >> modify it > > I have a patch doing this, but there is one problem that i don't see how > to solve neatly. At the moment we set hidden-headers to the union of > message-hidden-headers and notmuch-mua-hidden-headers. This means that > if the user wants to show a header that is normally one of > message-hidden-headers they have to set message-hidden-headers (ie they > can't just change notmuch-mua-hidden headers). > > If we want it that people can show such a header just by changing a > notmuch variable then I don't see how to do it neatly without breaking > some existing setups. > > Any suggestions? My inclination is to say "if you want to change the headers that are hidden in message mode, change `message-hidden-headers'" and don't bother with any notmuch specific settings. That, of course, leads me to wonder why I ever added `notmuch-mua-hidden-headers' in the first place... > Best wishes > > Mark > >> >> - adding in-reply-to notmuch-mua >> >> - providing a keybinding to toggle visibility of hidden headers that >> works better than the current use of widen >> >> d > _______________________________________________ > notmuch mailing list > notmuch@notmuchmail.org > https://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch