bug#68732: 29.1; shell-command-default-error-buffer is not interactive

[Stefan Kangas <stefankangas@gmail.com>]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2024 16:16:21 +0100
>> From: Krzysztof Żelechowski <giecrilj@stegny.2a.pl>
>> Cc: 68732@debbugs.gnu.org
>>
>> The point is, the function shell-command does not use this variable because it only affects interactive
>> use.  So indeed, writing a command that invokes shell-command is an option, but it does make a use
>> case for the existence of this variable.
>>
>> My POV is splitting standard output and standard error (maybe on demand) is a basic usability
>> requirement and should not require writing custom commands.
>>
>> The problem is not with using setq by users, it is with getting non-developers to write and execute
>> Lisp scripts to accomplish basic tasks, including scripts that just invoke setq.  The latter obviously is
>> not a problem when you are a scientist, but I imagine that the front end would be much cleaner if
>> operable cleanly without scripting (again, this concept limited to basic tasks obviously).
>
> We cannot possibly make every variable a defcustom, just because
> someone somewhere will need to set a variable while not being a
> programmer, can we?
>
> So, while I understand your motivation, it still doesn't convince me
> to make the variable a user option.  Splitting stdout and stderr might
> be a basic usability requirement in your eyes, but IME users rarely
> send stderr to a separate place, which is why this variable is not a
> defcustom.

I agree, so I'm closing this bug report now.