From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Luc Teirlinck Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Documentation for custom-file - is not (load custom-file) needed? Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 12:05:34 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <200412231805.iBNI5Y514318@raven.dms.auburn.edu> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1103825374 25442 80.91.229.6 (23 Dec 2004 18:09:34 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 18:09:34 +0000 (UTC) Cc: johnw@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Dec 23 19:09:27 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1ChXOx-0001vQ-00 for ; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 19:09:27 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1ChXZY-0003mU-Hv for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 13:20:24 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1ChXZF-0003jQ-Bz for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 13:20:05 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1ChXZD-0003is-RE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 13:20:04 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1ChXZD-0003iX-77 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 13:20:03 -0500 Original-Received: from [131.204.53.104] (helo=manatee.dms.auburn.edu) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1ChXNW-0008Tj-V9; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 13:07:59 -0500 Original-Received: from raven.dms.auburn.edu (raven.dms.auburn.edu [131.204.53.29]) by manatee.dms.auburn.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id iBNI7wFu029618; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 12:07:58 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: (from teirllm@localhost) by raven.dms.auburn.edu (8.11.7p1+Sun/8.11.7) id iBNI5Y514318; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 12:05:34 -0600 (CST) X-Authentication-Warning: raven.dms.auburn.edu: teirllm set sender to teirllm@dms.auburn.edu using -f Original-To: lennart.borgman.073@student.lu.se In-reply-to: (message from LENNART BORGMAN on Thu, 23 Dec 2004 15:07:54 +0100) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:31350 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:31350 Lennart Borgman wrote: I think that custom-file should not be saved to "the custom file" because of the problems we discussed before when renaming or copying this file. If you rename the file, you will have to have to make some additional changes, whether you customized it through Custom or not. Obviously, the easiest thing to do is not to rename the file. I do not understand the problems when copying the file (to have a backup presumably). I have done so several times. Actually, I have backup-by-copying set to true, so my custom-files get copied every time a backup is made. I never noticed a problem. Is there any reason to save custom-file? Could it not just be removed before the actual saving? If we would do that, it would be a lot better just to turn the defcustom into a defvar. The latter _is_ an obvious alternative to the patches I proposed. _If_ we pretty much decide that we are happy with the situation that would result after such a removal and that we do not plan to re-add the defcustom with some fancy interface later, that might make sense. There would be a one-time problem for people who customized it with Custom before. They would have to set `custom-file' in their .emacs and manually remove the line from their `custom-set-variables' form. We would have to point that out in the NEWS (and hope that people actually read it). However, if there is a non-negligible probability that we might want to make additional changes later, it is better to leave everything as it is right now (with just doc and bug fixes), as my patch does. Every final solution we come up with has to be compatible with the way things worked in earlier versions. Having intervening versions with different rules will tie our hands badly. Keeping the defcustom essentially means that we do not break anything that was not broken before. The defcustom for `custom-file' has apparently existed for as long as Custom itself has. Sincerely, Luc.