bug#62700: 29.0.60; minibuffer-{previous,next,choose}-completion behave unintuitively when point is not at end of buffer

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> From: sbaugh@catern.com
> Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2023 11:48:50 +0000 (UTC)
> Cc: 62700@debbugs.gnu.org, sbaugh@janestreet.com, juri@linkov.net
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> >> From: sbaugh@catern.com
> >> Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2023 21:38:52 +0000 (UTC)
> >> Cc: 62700@debbugs.gnu.org, sbaugh@janestreet.com, juri@linkov.net
> >> 
> >> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> >> > I asked for the changes to affect only code specific to M-<UP> and
> >> > M-<DOWN>, but the patch you posted doesn't limit itself to that,
> >> > AFAICT.  Or what am I missing?
> >> 
> >> Ah, I didn't realize that was what you were asking for.  I can do that,
> >> certainly, but why not also cover M-RET?  The bug exists in the exact
> >> same form for M-RET and it will be confusing (though better than
> >> nothing, definitely) if the fix applies to M-<UP> and M-<DOWN> but not
> >> M-RET.
> >
> > If the issue exists for M-RET, then fixing that case as well is okay.
> > The request was not to affect any code that handles also other
> > situation and other keys.
> 
> M-RET is bound to minibuffer-choose-completion, so then why the
> objection to a patch which affects minibuffer-choose-completion?

Because we never talked about M-RET until now?