From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#28814: [BUMP, PATCH] (26.0.90; When *xref* window is needed, original window-switching intent is lost ) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 12:41:31 +0300 Message-ID: <83r2tn6244.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87infjm3p3.fsf@gmail.com> <871slyi3lk.fsf_-_@gmail.com> <87lgk22ryu.fsf@gmail.com> <87fua91vis.fsf@gmail.com> <13af136e-12fb-4e8d-81ff-63424b1e1943@yandex.ru> <83inf38dq2.fsf@gnu.org> <87k1zjs0xa.fsf@gmail.com> <83fua78ce9.fsf@gnu.org> <87a80fvte2.fsf@gmail.com> <83y3nx7tdn.fsf@gnu.org> <873765wjdr.fsf@gmail.com> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1509183741 31262 195.159.176.226 (28 Oct 2017 09:42:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 09:42:21 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 28814@debbugs.gnu.org, dgutov@yandex.ru To: joaotavora@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Jo=C3=A3o_?= =?UTF-8?Q?T=C3=A1vora?=) Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Oct 28 11:42:17 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1e8Nd6-0006pQ-HO for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 28 Oct 2017 11:42:12 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60317 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e8Nd8-0000ds-Op for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 28 Oct 2017 05:42:14 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58556) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e8Nd0-0000cI-2U for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 28 Oct 2017 05:42:07 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e8Ncw-0001q7-RT for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 28 Oct 2017 05:42:06 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:57611) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e8Ncw-0001q1-N7 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 28 Oct 2017 05:42:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1e8Ncw-0002y3-Eu for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 28 Oct 2017 05:42:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 09:42:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 28814 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch Original-Received: via spool by 28814-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B28814.150918370811385 (code B ref 28814); Sat, 28 Oct 2017 09:42:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 28814) by debbugs.gnu.org; 28 Oct 2017 09:41:48 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38059 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1e8Nci-0002xZ-Et for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 28 Oct 2017 05:41:48 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:39284) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1e8Ncf-0002xM-C4 for 28814@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 28 Oct 2017 05:41:46 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e8NcX-0001dL-1c for 28814@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 28 Oct 2017 05:41:40 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:46360) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e8NcW-0001dH-Tt; Sat, 28 Oct 2017 05:41:36 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=4501 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1e8NcW-00008w-0z; Sat, 28 Oct 2017 05:41:36 -0400 In-reply-to: <873765wjdr.fsf@gmail.com> (joaotavora@gmail.com) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:139098 Archived-At: > From: joaotavora@gmail.com (João Távora) > Cc: dgutov@yandex.ru, 28814@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 00:59:28 +0100 > > - In node "Looking up identifiers" there are is a repeated explanation > of what motivates a *xref* buffer (lines 1831 and 1863). I think its > clearer if this only happens once, so I merged the two. People who use the manual as a reference seldom read the entire node. Instead, they read the description of the single subject they were looking for, and move on. If the reader was only interested in reading about "M-.", with your version she will not see the description of the XREF buffer, unless she reads on. So I don't think the repetition here is a bad idea, especially since it doesn't really repeat the same text. > - Finally, I changed "To go back to places @emph{from where} you found > the definition" to "Once you are at the definition, you may want to go > back to places @{from where}". This is indeed purely stylistic, but I > thought it was a less abrupt transition from the preceding paragraph > that talks about going to definitions. The change looks larger than it > really is because of the paragraph filling, but I did only change the > first sentence. When the original style is clear and unambiguous, I usually avoid changing it, because style preferences are personal. The additions for the new and changed bindings are, of course, okay, that wasn't what prompted my comment. Please show the final patch with the above comments fixed, and I think it's okay to put this on emacs-26 after all. Thanks.