Patch to cus-edit.el

Patch to cus-edit.el

[Per Abrahamsen]

I added custom-unlispify-remove-prefixes to the custom-buffer
customize group, because I looked for it in that group and couldn't
find it.

In general, is it necessary to ask for permission to commit small
improvement to the customize specifications like this?  That is,
adding :group and :link entries to defcustoms, or improving :type
entries?

Is there even any reason to mention I do it here?

I will add ChangeLog entries, of course.

2002-02-24  Per Abrahamsen  <abraham@dina.kvl.dk>

	* cus-edit.el (custom-unlispify-remove-prefixes): Add to
	`custom-buffer' customize group.

*** cus-edit.el.~1.144.~	Mon Feb 11 16:10:33 2002
--- cus-edit.el	Sun Feb 24 09:30:47 2002
***************
*** 431,436 ****
--- 431,437 ----
  (defcustom custom-unlispify-remove-prefixes nil
    "Non-nil means remove group prefixes from option names in buffer."
    :group 'custom-menu
+   :group 'custom-buffer
    :type 'boolean)
  
  (defun custom-unlispify-menu-entry (symbol &optional no-suffix)

_______________________________________________
Emacs-devel mailing list
Emacs-devel@gnu.org
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel

Re: Patch to cus-edit.el

[Richard Stallman]

    In general, is it necessary to ask for permission to commit small
    improvement to the customize specifications like this?  That is,
    adding :group and :link entries to defcustoms, or improving :type
    entries?

Not at all--please just go ahead and do them.  There's no need to send
mail about it afterwards, either.  These changes are uncontroversial,
and I have confidence that whatever you do of this sort is right.

_______________________________________________
Emacs-devel mailing list
Emacs-devel@gnu.org
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel