From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: johnbent@lanl.gov (John Bent)
Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2008 09:21:37 -0700
Subject: [sup-talk] [PATCH] don't try to open the next thread if
	there	isn't one available
In-Reply-To: <1202232384-sup-1186@south>
References: <1201681010-sup-3463@archie>
	<1201707688-sup-6637@tangerine.lanl.gov>
	<1202232384-sup-1186@south>
Message-ID: <1202314746-sup-2532@tangerine.lanl.gov>

Excerpts from William Morgan's message of Tue Feb 05 10:27:26 -0700 2008:
> Reformatted excerpts from John Bent's message of 2008-01-30:
> > Perhaps I should just change my habits but I like to traverse my inbox in
> > chronological order (i.e. bottom up instead of top down).  If anyone could 
> > make a patch that does ,a or ,n but moves it up instead of down, I'd very
> > much appreciate it.
> 
> I do this too, often. Try ']' in next.
> 
That's great!  Thanks.

> I really need a better keybinding. Wonder if I just should bite the
> bullet and do < and > for previous and next instead of , and ].
> 
That'd be nice too (and probably more intuitive).  Or maybe it's really
hard but user-defined macros or shortcuts.  So people could map
< to ,n and > to ]n.  Or did I get the order wrong?  Also, if we had
macros, I'd map something to |muttprint.