From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Artur Malabarba Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#20968: 25.0.50; Be able to specify the output directory for `byte-compile-file' Date: Sat, 4 Jul 2015 12:10:36 +0100 Message-ID: References: <23829743-922e-4304-8ab3-b762b8193860@default> <74y4iytdjg.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <83pp49zb03.fsf@gnu.org> <83egkpyvvd.fsf@gnu.org> <83si94xrcn.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: bruce.connor.am@gmail.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1436008284 29533 80.91.229.3 (4 Jul 2015 11:11:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 4 Jul 2015 11:11:24 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 20968@debbugs.gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jul 04 13:11:15 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ZBLLm-0006Mg-Vu for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 04 Jul 2015 13:11:15 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:43876 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZBLLm-0005in-3C for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 04 Jul 2015 07:11:14 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45949) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZBLLh-0005i9-Dd for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 04 Jul 2015 07:11:10 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZBLLc-0001r3-59 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 04 Jul 2015 07:11:09 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:37860) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZBLLc-0001qd-0s for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 04 Jul 2015 07:11:04 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1ZBLLb-0006bf-1R for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 04 Jul 2015 07:11:03 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Artur Malabarba Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 04 Jul 2015 11:11:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 20968 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 20968-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B20968.143600824725366 (code B ref 20968); Sat, 04 Jul 2015 11:11:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 20968) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Jul 2015 11:10:47 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39306 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1ZBLLJ-0006b2-EN for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 04 Jul 2015 07:10:46 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-la0-f53.google.com ([209.85.215.53]:33158) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1ZBLLG-0006am-P3 for 20968@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 04 Jul 2015 07:10:43 -0400 Original-Received: by laar3 with SMTP id r3so108509784laa.0 for <20968@debbugs.gnu.org>; Sat, 04 Jul 2015 04:10:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:reply-to:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=GTpbYEw2tldvCoK3fu+fJaudL4vY2JKQatoE6CJPz+o=; b=FRNIBennEUt2v8YXiFWw8JuisvwnouGhHWnEoDmxt/fmQjCZNI9ssPU5WHzKFm3S/N C7zXsOh5ng9+MSSuSDROEiieMBkHM+N6gs0j0PlgbEzadYnNMK/SsPsNxIljbXwMkUue mZvNG9vnL1ehV1Ml+pY8NBWK16AWGQNJlguBip1GGgKxAmKcTjtE+8AJNnjrotLYW3Jp K6H1p7UktRVghQZHC3thtEbsjPUbe78dxncmGPSXaib7O9C/sBhtTpGrwRTwYyApoMGq mQAKrLBo7P1EOXbkqkxB4Kf4/vN7noWJDg91v17nFk7Q5Wffmn9h6w9W8GWnJg8b/ga1 kxnA== X-Received: by 10.152.7.239 with SMTP id m15mr38895053laa.95.1436008236770; Sat, 04 Jul 2015 04:10:36 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.25.214.133 with HTTP; Sat, 4 Jul 2015 04:10:36 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <83si94xrcn.fsf@gnu.org> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 67MZKuPIxOtBViuWD452bUinAxg X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 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-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:104679 Archived-At: > . There are more places to search when you are after some specific > issue. If you mean =E2=80=9Ca developer looking for the discussion around an old bug=E2=80=9D, see what I wrote on the 3rd item below. If you mean =E2=80=9Ca user looking for an answer/solution to a question/issue=E2=80=9D, see here. To most people nowadays there's only one place to search, their search engine of choice. So, to them, it's not yet another place to search. StackOverflow (SO) questions in particular are usually very easy to find like that. When I have a programming question/issue I never visit SO, I just Google it and 90% it lands me on SO, even if the post is many years old. It is much rarer for my searches to take me to a relevant mailing list on the subject. And then I usually have to read through several (many?) messages to get what I want, whereas SO posts are more focused and self-contained. Understand, I'm not arguing whether search engines do a good or a bad job in that regard. I'm just saying that is where most people will look for answers, and to them the availability of information on these other sites only helps. > . Issues that reveal Emacs bugs are many times not reported to the > bug tracker, and remain unknown to us for many moons, sometimes > years. That's probably true of other sites, but on emacs.stackexchange the gurus are frequently telling users to file a report when something looks like a bug (and so far I usually see them follow through). We also occasionally tell them to file feature requests, and a lot of times a new package/feature has arisen as a result of a question there. > . If and when people eventually do submit bug reports, they cannot > be bothered to report all the details, and just provide a link to > those "elsewhere" discussions, so whoever wants to fix the problem > needs to read through them, which is not easy (the messages aren't > sorted by date, etc.). A discussion on SO usually consists of a question with comments (or an answer with comments), and these comments are sorted by date. The global list of questions is indeed not sorted by date. But if anyone files a bug and links me to the site's frontpage instead of linking to the specific discussion, then they're just being daft and I wouldn't hesitate to ask for a better link (or, really, ask them to bring in more information). > This becomes worse as time goes by. I had my share of fixing bugs > caused by changes made years ago. When that happens, you want to be > able to establish (a) why was the change made, and (b) what was the > use case or test case that served as the reason for the changes. > That's because whatever change you are going to install, you will want > to make sure it doesn't reintroduce back the original problem, so you > will want a good understanding of that past issue, and a test case. > Having to search 3 Emacs lists is already bad enough, having to search > in addition 2 stack-foo forums, which are not archived by dates (at > least I know of now way to search them given the date of the change in > Emacs) makes that unbearable, so I usually give up. Yes, that sounds frustrating. When a bug is filed it's definitely important to have the bug information here. Some people have enough common sense to do that when filing the bug, others will need to be asked to do that. Besides, links the one Drew provided above are pretty straightforward too. If you follow it, it takes you straight to the post where a user details his use-case and asks about such a feature. So there really isn't any searching around involved (though I personally think all these details should be provided here too). > What's more, I don't understand why people use those places. The > Emacs forums are quite friendly, so there should be no reason for them > to avoid us. They're not avoiding us, they're just defaulting to what they know. Different groups of people (be it due to generation or expertise) are accustomed to different sets of technologies, and few are those who take the time to learn something outside their set. It's not a good thing, it's just the way things are and it goes way above E= macs. Besides, these other places have their advantages too. I'm sure we can find discussions somewhere about the pros and cons of other media vs mailing lists.