From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jens Schmidt via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#64154: 29.0.92; Provide additional details on GnuPG and EPA usage in epa.texi Date: Sat, 1 Jul 2023 19:56:08 +0200 Message-ID: <7f41744d-bb32-1b0d-8fea-69f91b413b0c@vodafonemail.de> References: <83wn02r0s7.fsf@gnu.org> <90275992-b539-e611-d92b-9bfe57d9d58d@vodafonemail.de> <056aa3cb-51e6-dc01-a299-1200ba79e211@vodafonemail.de> <831qhtts01.fsf@gnu.org> <9e4c56f2-0124-fdf1-c719-ca6219c1ab28@vodafonemail.de> <3036a576-9260-8932-cb07-3941046f2dd8@vodafonemail.de> <83a5wgrwzj.fsf@gnu.org> <196f75be-0935-c481-8a9e-7157f3e650d0@vodafonemail.de> <83o7kvpn22.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Jens Schmidt Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="20284"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.12.0 Cc: 64154@debbugs.gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Jul 01 19:57:22 2023 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1qFeqX-00055q-Oa for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 01 Jul 2023 19:57:21 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qFeqK-0007Nw-HM; Sat, 01 Jul 2023 13:57:08 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qFeqI-0007No-WA for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 01 Jul 2023 13:57:07 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qFeqE-0007t9-LT for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 01 Jul 2023 13:57:06 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qFeqE-0000wx-Ae for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 01 Jul 2023 13:57:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Jens Schmidt Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 01 Jul 2023 17:57:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 64154 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch Original-Received: via spool by 64154-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B64154.16882341883606 (code B ref 64154); Sat, 01 Jul 2023 17:57:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 64154) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Jul 2023 17:56:28 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58673 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qFepf-0000w6-Km for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 01 Jul 2023 13:56:28 -0400 Original-Received: from mr4.vodafonemail.de ([145.253.228.164]:53094) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qFepd-0000vq-3T for 64154@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 01 Jul 2023 13:56:27 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=vodafonemail.de; s=vfde-mb-mr2-21dec; t=1688234179; bh=TavNaLUWvLTZkiQfIpk0+OLEBLCTxa3slXRJuq3Sw30=; h=Message-ID:Date:User-Agent:Subject:Content-Language:To:References: From:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:From; b=X/81jys2u23+tzKxGUZmcZE4eOb2SpKTkRtp7+se0gvZW9Zuequh+cg0i9UdJO4gv SmzMd99ioYubBiPvyFZ9mh5b4JjCYyLao+JiESbSH6I7eEKjElz5YeyfySJvmcTtZL mzY2iQpumq4pIf8PSTrWv3cfmbd5UK+S66YD5FaI= Original-Received: from smtp.vodafone.de (unknown [10.0.0.2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mr4.vodafonemail.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Qtfxv0Xnfz1xy7; Sat, 1 Jul 2023 17:56:18 +0000 (UTC) Original-Received: from [192.168.178.41] (port-83-236-52-51.dynamic.as20676.net [83.236.52.51]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.vodafone.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4Qtfxl4RsNz9sJl; Sat, 1 Jul 2023 17:56:08 +0000 (UTC) Content-Language: de-DE-frami, en-US In-Reply-To: <83o7kvpn22.fsf@gnu.org> X-purgate-type: clean X-purgate: clean X-purgate-size: 3516 X-purgate-ID: 155817::1688234174-AF7F2C59-0DB0415F/0/0 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:264417 Archived-At: On 2023-07-01 19:19, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Date: Sat, 1 Jul 2023 18:56:20 +0200 Cc: 64154@debbugs.gnu.org >> From: Jens Schmidt >> >> Thanks for the review, next version attached. > > Will review later. Sigh. Probably no need for it. You have some good points, and after reading them I understand that I need to go for a further round-trip. So you might want to wait for that and review the combined patches. >> ... I don't quite agree on that one: For example, I use completion >> on my index queries. And at least with my configuration ("-Q" is >> different here, agreed) I won't find "gnupg version compatibility" >> when I type "comp TAB" and if there would be only >> >> @chapter GnuPG Version Compatibility @cindex gnupg version >> compatibility > > Using completion is not the only way of using the index: one can > simply type the word or phrase, and review all the hits, without > hitting TAB. But yes, you need to consider completion as well, so > when you remove redundant index entries, you should remove those that > begin with words that are less likely to be used. > > And this actually raises the main issue with writing good index > entries: you need to think about typical phrases that users will have > in mind when looking for the subject at hand. E.g., is "gnupg > version compatibility" something that users will want to find? > Maybe changing it to "compatibility of gnupg versions" would be > better? I actually (almost) had this one: @cindex GnuPG version compatibility @cindex version compatibility with GnuPG @cindex compatibility with GnuPG so I hope we're closing in. Not sure though: Are these three entries "too redundant" in your opinion? And if so, why would that hurt? >> Similar problems arise if anybody actually cares looking at the >> alphabetically ordered index, be it in an online reader or in >> print. (After all an index should be there for alphabetical >> lookup, shouldn't it?) > > Not in the on-line manual, no. Index entries in Info are intended to > be used without going to the Index node at all. What about those who use pdf or even print this stuff? >> BTW, above chapter also has a note on capitalization of index >> entries, so I went for "GnuPG" and "EasyPG" in the index entries >> instead of all lower-casing them. > > Please don't. Capitalized index entries sort in locale-dependent > order, so the Index nodes look different depending on the locale > where the manual was produced, and in some cases this could land the > reader in a node other than the one you intended, if there are index > entries for "Foo something" and "foo some other". OK, will undo that. > As for adding the "a" part, I think it's a mistake: index entries > don't need articles, and they get in the way of completion. Will undo that as well. >> Finally, I noticed that the index entries are not quite consistent >> w.r.t. tense: Some use present tense, some present continuous. I >> could change that ... > > There are no rules here, only common sense and the projected use by > the readers. Does this "no rules" relate to only to my last statement or to index entries in general? Because in general you seem to have quite a bunch of rules, and well-founded ones, and if had known these before we could have saved a round-trip or two. But I don't even dare to propose changing the Texinfo manual ...