From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs,gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: bug#10238: R in gnus-summary does not pop a frame like F does Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 01:30:49 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87pqe8kbg1.fsf@lifelogs.com> <83pqe823oj.fsf@gnu.org> <87vco0ivb1.fsf@lifelogs.com> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1327473116 24851 80.91.229.12 (25 Jan 2012 06:31:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 06:31:56 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 10238@debbugs.gnu.org, tzz@lifelogs.com, larsi@gnus.org, ding@gnus.org To: Andreas Schwab Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jan 25 07:31:49 2012 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 1RpwOa-0004Hx-7J for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 25 Jan 2012 07:31:48 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:37804 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RpwOZ-0002uc-MA for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 25 Jan 2012 01:31:47 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:57145) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RpwOV-0002uU-Uq for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Jan 2012 01:31:45 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RpwOS-0004EK-At for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Jan 2012 01:31:43 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:37087) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RpwOS-0004E7-9B for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Jan 2012 01:31:40 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1RpwOp-0000ub-Cn; Wed, 25 Jan 2012 01:32:03 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org, bugs@gnus.org Resent-Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 06:32:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 10238 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs,gnus X-GNU-PR-Keywords: fixed Original-Received: via spool by 10238-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B10238.13274730893461 (code B ref 10238); Wed, 25 Jan 2012 06:32:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 10238) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 Jan 2012 06:31:29 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:42473 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1RpwOC-0000td-1i for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Jan 2012 01:31:28 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]:56050 ident=Debian-exim) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1RpwO4-0000tQ-2P for 10238@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Jan 2012 01:31:22 -0500 Original-Received: from eliz by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RpwNd-0008Fp-W0; Wed, 25 Jan 2012 01:30:49 -0500 In-reply-to: (message from Andreas Schwab on Wed, 25 Jan 2012 00:02:06 +0100) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list 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:55973 gmane.emacs.gnus.general:80946 Archived-At: > From: Andreas Schwab > Cc: Eli Zaretskii , 10238@debbugs.gnu.org, larsi@gnus.org, ding@gnus.org > Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 00:02:06 +0100 > > Ted Zlatanov writes: > > > We're talking about VCS commit messages, not docstrings. It's a > > different context, and for VCS commits often there is information that > > needs to be distilled into that first line and 80 chars are not enough. > > The summary line doesn't need to be precise. It should just give an > informal overview of the change. 100% agreement.