From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#10057: 24.0.91; doc string of `Info-find-file' Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 06:52:29 -0800 Message-ID: References: <8B7B45455BDC4BFBAC6E24B36D21695F@us.oracle.com><7DCB4AC13F2B4BA19A9BBB34E78086CA@us.oracle.com> <5C41898136234BBFA995CBC4D05B7108@us.oracle.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1321455210 32227 80.91.229.12 (16 Nov 2011 14:53:30 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 14:53:30 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 10057@debbugs.gnu.org To: "'Eli Zaretskii'" Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 16 15:53:26 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RQgre-0000Xg-1t for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 15:53:26 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34973 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RQgrd-0004iI-MF for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 09:53:25 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:35632) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RQgrb-0004i6-3P for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 09:53:23 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RQgrV-0004FD-9Y for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 09:53:23 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:50897) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RQgrV-0004F9-6W for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 09:53:17 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RQgsD-0003on-Ts for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 09:54:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: "Drew Adams" Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 14:54:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 10057 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 10057-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B10057.132145521414640 (code B ref 10057); Wed, 16 Nov 2011 14:54:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 10057) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Nov 2011 14:53:34 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RQgrm-0003o5-Co for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 09:53:34 -0500 Original-Received: from rcsinet15.oracle.com ([148.87.113.117]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RQgrk-0003nr-IO for 10057@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 09:53:33 -0500 Original-Received: from ucsinet22.oracle.com (ucsinet22.oracle.com [156.151.31.94]) by rcsinet15.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.4/Switch-3.4.4) with ESMTP id pAGEqeQU011230 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 16 Nov 2011 14:52:40 GMT Original-Received: from acsmt358.oracle.com (acsmt358.oracle.com [141.146.40.158]) by ucsinet22.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id pAGEqdKJ000018 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 16 Nov 2011 14:52:39 GMT Original-Received: from abhmt112.oracle.com (abhmt112.oracle.com [141.146.116.64]) by acsmt358.oracle.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id pAGEqXXS032708; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 08:52:33 -0600 Original-Received: from dradamslap1 (/10.159.39.104) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 06:52:33 -0800 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: Thread-Index: AcykOpYWMdMBCBK4R2q+aBbm182gDAAMI4Fg X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157 X-Source-IP: ucsinet22.oracle.com [156.151.31.94] X-CT-RefId: str=0001.0A090203.4EC3CE39.0054,ss=1,re=0.000,fgs=0 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 09:54:01 -0500 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) 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:53987 Archived-At: > > Apparently, we should not bother to point out when > > parameters to functions etc. are undefined/undescribed. > > No. "We" should of course report such potential omissions, Not according to Stefan's "general rule": According to that, omission indicates clearly to everyone that that the behavior is unpredictable and unsupported. > but when told that the maintainers don't want to spell that out > in the doc, "we" should accept their judgment, What judgment not to spell it out? Was the bug classified won't-fix? wishlist? not-a-bug? Nope, not yet. There was some disagreement and discussion about what the doc omission might mean to readers, but there was also: Send a patch. If someone wants to install, OK. Install it yourself. > instead of raising the level of flames and continuing the argument. It was not I who made a mountain out of this tiny molehill of a bug. It was a trivial `t' -> `non-nil' substitution to make things clear. Do it or don't do it - your choice. To me, making that change should be a no-brainer, but the suggestion nevertheless engendered quite a lot of flak. Including some that had nothing to do with this bug in particular or even such doc omissions in general - ad hominem comment about my participation in bug reporting and fixing bugs. AFAICT, there was no decision not to make that change, and no decision to make it. There was discussion about what the omission (and such omissions generall) can mean for readers. And yes, there were some flames ("fun") - about my degree of involvement in fixing bugs etc. My end of the discussion has been limited to what it is we want to tell users, and the effects that incomplete info can have (confuse readers, make them wonder). I've been clear that the choice about this proposed change is Stefan's to make, obviously. I have no problem with accepting whatever "judgment" might come. Bug reporters only raise a question; the maintainers answer it: fix/won't fix etc.