From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?Jostein=20Kj=C3=B8nigsen?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: nxml-mode: Derive from prog-mode instead of text-mode Date: Tue, 16 May 2017 21:02:56 +0200 Message-ID: <1494961376.1006215.978713264.44871586@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: <1494412509.2069441.971865104.0646ACD6@webmail.messagingengine.com> <8337ccbrar.fsf@gnu.org> <1494439153.1311720.972341016.7C2EC66A@webmail.messagingengine.com> <83o9v0a66q.fsf@gnu.org> <1494487799.3240345.972964808.43DA610E@webmail.messagingengine.com> <87r2zqvmy9.fsf@pokyo> <1494930855.4131543.978121176.7BB5246B@webmail.messagingengine.com> <83y3tw63ap.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: jostein@kjonigsen.net NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_----------=_149496137610062150" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1494961443 23616 195.159.176.226 (16 May 2017 19:04:03 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 16 May 2017 19:04:03 +0000 (UTC) Cc: p.stephani2@gmail.com, tom@tromey.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii , jostein@kjonigsen.net Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue May 16 21:03:58 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dAhlF-0005sb-Nk for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 16 May 2017 21:03:58 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:43555 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dAhlI-0005sy-0C for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 16 May 2017 15:04:00 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41472) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dAhkO-0005TZ-7s for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 16 May 2017 15:03:08 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dAhkM-0007dg-W6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 16 May 2017 15:03:04 -0400 Original-Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.25]:55395) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dAhkH-0007Wn-O7; Tue, 16 May 2017 15:02:58 -0400 Original-Received: from compute6.internal (compute6.nyi.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BB0E207CC; Tue, 16 May 2017 15:02:56 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from web3 ([10.202.2.213]) by compute6.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 16 May 2017 15:02:56 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= secure.kjonigsen.net; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=wE8jggL+Tj0jcliUHf7XxMmD730840QjYp/DzTIYL qk=; b=e6is/6Iq4ETgQosdwM7j0cTQvYas9TSNgL/IW+F0RPulAmNFW+2hXD73d bh9ila6BmwG8PdpKqzdsSPOE3NAKhoOQakfYpVgb7WLkrmUemeZFAULtZMdvhOTT US1h94zYGcga7AxGtksHFaNXkiVv/MLhEatvmWb+2QPvw/gcYLaY54G/GbQ+fukQ qjhb16dK89L7n2542Ty9wqbCDTZ/LyyD6OpYyOFqFTQr50jPWeDuC471si0oAIYE kGiOwghml1bFhT/mot++OJCdeQk/lLRorKu2BONTliGdnFCNfQ9lTG8MaXg6Ebw9 kd+DXO7RustBwbz8cm51hqbxqWZIg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=wE8jggL+Tj0jcliUHf7XxMmD730840QjYp/DzTIYLqk=; b=Pk9wXQoqNxn4 HiD6hpDakWGsr7YdU5uqCKGdDrbfBQMU9KKhQ/mevKKMp3PDW1Gk2KyPM+FIvjHp db20Zlv2OLXosh4AO+QrhM9cyLjODoYJdwz5YORgRNBkXUj5xn0k+QykCmacnILI cyxLRsviou6SYZ9KiYzeqK0DZPK5PbLWBJHuEBBmGNEYEBraKIi5AS9ipsYJwcBA BJft2Mlz3rqLtmVQSATCZthTInMCwZLQOSYN9o5w7yQgrCSzQ+RHirzkL0tsB0TG 3MM8BLkTLDVsYfKBH5bnJ72rnwBMqTH03Bp97WLg1khInsYBtOzJptAHwAZ9ai+Q X0bGVQrxsw== X-ME-Sender: Original-Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 99) id 35CE39EF1A; Tue, 16 May 2017 15:02:56 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface - ajax-a5162694 In-Reply-To: <83y3tw63ap.fsf@gnu.org> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 66.111.4.25 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:214891 Archived-At: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --_----------=_149496137610062150 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" On Tue, May 16, 2017, at 08:54 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> From: Jostein Kj=C3=B8nigsen >> Cc: jostein@kjonigsen.net, Eli Zaretskii , emacs- >> devel@gnu.org>> Date: Tue, 16 May 2017 12:34:15 +0200 >>=20 >> 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 customiza= tions. >>=20 >> If we can agree on that, I think there are options for moving >> forward.>=20 > 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 --_----------=_149496137610062150 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8"
On Tue, May 16, 2017, at 08:54 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
From: Jostein Kj=C3=B8nigsen <= ;jostein@secure.kjonigsen.n= et>
Cc: jostein@kjonigsen.net= , Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, <= a href=3D"mailto:emacs-devel@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 major= ity 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 bikes= hedding, 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 a= nnoy whoever finds that unexpected)
  • Derive nxml-mode from prog-= mode instead (and annoy whoever finds that unexpected)
  • C= reate a new intermediate mode for deriving (structured-text-mode, or simila= r) and use this for all structured and textual data-format files (and thus,= nxml-mode). Let people make new hooks as they see fit.
<= div>
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?

--
Regards
Jostein



--_----------=_149496137610062150--