From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#44611: Prefix arg for xref-goto-xref Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 19:44:37 +0200 Message-ID: <83pn2znloa.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87k0up68e4.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <99772eb6-5a4e-7cf6-259d-0e9429e6bf97@yandex.ru> <878sb3n0a9.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <48f942f9-a557-0185-25fe-612e78cd9071@yandex.ru> <875z67gd6z.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <72e9e5e9-651f-401f-2e26-faaac1b7fdb5@yandex.ru> <87v9cxleff.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <834kkhtaxm.fsf@gnu.org> <874kkgswg2.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <83v9cwsct7.fsf@gnu.org> <87k0tab3y0.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <83pn31rg5a.fsf@gnu.org> <877dp9ycq6.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <837dp8r250.fsf@gnu.org> <4a0c8870-e2e7-97c7-5808-afa704ebee13@yandex.ru> <83mty4pj0u.fsf@gnu.org> <1d9bf365-224f-bb41-d79c-e22d110b41e3@yandex.ru> <83eejgpbs8.fsf@gnu.org> <9fa9d286-4497-baa9-15cd-1ef31651781f@yandex.ru> <83a6u4p8nz.fsf@gnu.org> <3c740ee3-cc1c-e2e3-d540-7be0b37d91ef@yandex.ru> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="28718"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: juri@linkov.net, joaotavora@gmail.com, 44611@debbugs.gnu.org To: Dmitry Gutov Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Dec 24 18:46:37 2020 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 1ksUhB-0007N8-31 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 24 Dec 2020 18:46:37 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:54754 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ksUh8-0006MY-4I for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 24 Dec 2020 12:46:35 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:50124) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ksUgc-0006MF-T3 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 24 Dec 2020 12:46:02 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:44451) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ksUgc-00034k-LA for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 24 Dec 2020 12:46:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ksUgc-0004HI-Ig for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 24 Dec 2020 12:46:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 17:46:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 44611 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: fixed Original-Received: via spool by 44611-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B44611.160883190716371 (code B ref 44611); Thu, 24 Dec 2020 17:46:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 44611) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Dec 2020 17:45:07 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55997 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ksUfi-0004Fy-SJ for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 24 Dec 2020 12:45:07 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:56720) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ksUff-0004F1-Qs for 44611@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 24 Dec 2020 12:45:05 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:44554) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ksUfZ-0002op-V6; Thu, 24 Dec 2020 12:44:57 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:3882 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1ksUfZ-00024M-8V; Thu, 24 Dec 2020 12:44:57 -0500 In-Reply-To: <3c740ee3-cc1c-e2e3-d540-7be0b37d91ef@yandex.ru> (message from Dmitry Gutov on Wed, 23 Dec 2020 23:24:23 +0200) 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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:196658 Archived-At: > Cc: juri@linkov.net, joaotavora@gmail.com, 44611@debbugs.gnu.org > From: Dmitry Gutov > Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 23:24:23 +0200 > > On 23.12.2020 22:30, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > If you want to continue this discussion, please drop the attitude and > > try to see the issue from my POV. Otherwise I see no reason to > > continue, as I've-been-there-done-that too many times. > > Could you try seeing it from my POV? > > This is the first time I've heard about a rule like that regarding key > bindings (and not just changes in existing functions, ones that would > break existing configurations and third-party code). If I knew about it, > I wouldn't have approved that key binding in the first place, those 4 > years ago. Because "we can't change it later" is a pretty high standard > for acceptance. > > And now it feels like you're like changing the rules under my feet. It's > not a good way to make a subsystem maintainer feel. There is no new rule. I apologize if something I said could be interpreted that way. There's only one rule: not to make backward-incompatible changes without a very good reason. That is not limited to changes in functions and APIs, key bindings are definitely included. In fact, I think incompatible changes in key bindings are even worse than changes in code, since they might go against muscle memory, and nothing can fix that except a long and painful process of unlearning. I've reviewed all the NEWS since v24.1, and found only one incompatible change in key bindings -- which started by declaring the existing binding obsolete. So I think we change key bindings in incompatible ways only very rarely and carefully, and that is a Good Thing. Given the single precedent I found, I'm fine with declaring the current binding of TAB obsolete and providing a replacement for it ('b'? 'q'?), so that we could replace it in some future version after 28, if that is okay with you and Juri.