From: "Jostein Kjønigsen" <jostein@secure.kjonigsen.net>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, jostein@kjonigsen.net
Cc: p.stephani2@gmail.com, tom@tromey.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: nxml-mode: Derive from prog-mode instead of text-mode
Date: Tue, 16 May 2017 21:02:56 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1494961376.1006215.978713264.44871586@webmail.messagingengine.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <83y3tw63ap.fsf@gnu.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1817 bytes --]
On Tue, May 16, 2017, at 08:54 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> From: Jostein Kjønigsen <jostein@secure.kjonigsen.net>
>> Cc: jostein@kjonigsen.net, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, emacs-
>> devel@gnu.org>> Date: Tue, 16 May 2017 12:34:15 +0200
>>
>> So before anything else, I would like to assess if we can have a
>> majority agreement that prog-mode is NOT an>> implementation detail, but rather an API both users and developers
>> are encouraged to use for>> programming-related activities and customizations.
>>
>> If we can agree on that, I think there are options for moving
>> forward.>
> Beware: you are shifting the focus of this discussion from nxml-mode
> and its ilk, which was the original issue, to an almost completely
> unrelated one. There be a lot of unrelated bikeshedding (which
> actually already began).
Thanks Eli.
That's a good point. A point well taken.
Trying to get things back to where we started, with a minimal of
bikeshedding, I think there's 3 obvious choices for what direction
we can go:
* Keep everything as is. Keep nxml-mode derived from text-mode (and
annoy whoever finds that unexpected)
* Derive nxml-mode from prog-mode instead (and annoy whoever finds
*that* unexpected)
* Create a new intermediate mode for deriving (structured-text-mode,
or similar) and use this for all structured and textual data-
format files (and thus, nxml-mode). Let people make new hooks as
they see fit.
Personally I feel like the third option may be the most "proper" one,
but if people for some reason should be opposed to that, I still think
the second option makes more sense than the first one.
So... Is there any obvious counter-arguments to the third option? Any
reasons we should definitely *not* do that?
--
RegardsJostein
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2801 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-05-16 19:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-05-10 10:35 nxml-mode: Derive from prog-mode instead of text-mode Jostein Kjønigsen
2017-05-10 10:40 ` Yuri Khan
2017-05-10 10:52 ` Jostein Kjønigsen
2017-05-10 11:42 ` Yuri Khan
2017-05-10 12:00 ` Stefan Monnier
2017-05-10 16:38 ` Eli Zaretskii
2017-05-10 17:59 ` Jostein Kjønigsen
2017-05-10 18:59 ` Eli Zaretskii
2017-05-10 19:28 ` Eli Zaretskii
2017-05-11 7:29 ` Jostein Kjønigsen
2017-05-11 15:15 ` raman
2017-05-11 15:29 ` Eli Zaretskii
2017-05-11 15:26 ` Eli Zaretskii
2017-05-14 19:28 ` Philipp Stephani
2017-05-14 19:58 ` Dmitry Gutov
2017-05-15 3:05 ` Tom Tromey
2017-05-16 10:34 ` Jostein Kjønigsen
2017-05-16 11:17 ` Yuri Khan
2017-05-16 12:12 ` Stefan Monnier
2017-05-16 14:04 ` Drew Adams
2017-05-16 14:08 ` Eric Abrahamsen
2017-05-16 18:19 ` Drew Adams
2017-05-16 21:48 ` Stefan Monnier
2017-05-17 5:13 ` Yuri Khan
2017-05-17 12:53 ` Stefan Monnier
2017-05-17 16:02 ` Drew Adams
2017-05-17 16:20 ` Yuri Khan
2017-05-17 16:37 ` Stefan Monnier
2017-05-17 17:28 ` Drew Adams
2017-05-17 18:42 ` Stefan Monnier
2017-05-17 18:52 ` Johan Bockgård
2017-05-16 14:11 ` Stefan Monnier
2017-05-16 12:11 ` Stefan Monnier
2017-05-16 18:54 ` Eli Zaretskii
2017-05-16 19:02 ` Jostein Kjønigsen [this message]
2017-05-24 8:50 ` Jostein Kjønigsen
2017-05-30 8:05 ` Jostein Kjønigsen
2017-05-31 11:52 ` Stefan Monnier
2017-06-02 12:34 ` Jostein Kjønigsen
2017-06-06 14:45 ` Stefan Monnier
2017-05-16 21:50 ` Stefan Monnier
2017-05-11 1:32 ` Rolf Ade
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1494961376.1006215.978713264.44871586@webmail.messagingengine.com \
--to=jostein@secure.kjonigsen.net \
--cc=eliz@gnu.org \
--cc=emacs-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=jostein@kjonigsen.net \
--cc=p.stephani2@gmail.com \
--cc=tom@tromey.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).