From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ergus Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Changes for emacs 28 Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2020 14:53:32 +0200 Message-ID: <20200913125332.fnt5sbnrfkgt4qyi@Ergus> References: <83lfhhijbl.fsf@gnu.org> <871rj9uz12.fsf@gkayaalp.com> <875z8k4wv8.fsf@posteo.net> <83pn6shjni.fsf@gnu.org> <20200911074445.GB5194@tuxteam.de> <87zh5uqdqm.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <20200913103046.GC14385@tuxteam.de> <87y2lerlhl.fsf@gkayaalp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="40939"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, Juri Linkov To: =?utf-8?B?R8O2a3R1xJ8=?= Kayaalp Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Sep 13 14:54:38 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kHRWg-000AXI-9Q for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 13 Sep 2020 14:54:38 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48240 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kHRWf-0008QZ-Ab for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 13 Sep 2020 08:54:37 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:51884) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kHRVq-0007zQ-55 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 13 Sep 2020 08:53:46 -0400 Original-Received: from sonic314-13.consmr.mail.bf2.yahoo.com ([74.6.132.123]:38009) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kHRVm-0003N5-Mi for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 13 Sep 2020 08:53:45 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=aol.com; s=a2048; t=1600001617; bh=/tGmaXopCz5c5KZpVrIYa9T3enWZggFzs82+pMTYljY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From:Subject; b=V0po/MmJqHkiHsJFzNiXIXtWclyxjmK69Jufp360Z/AComy8eauFBt4b9yBeLv4KWAdKhDdOKJsPG6NINtY1fLOfW9u/31jODbJf0re0NAOG+qilJnHNlkqpLAxkx0aLjrgoseHhOs8dCqPL7X/Cx9CmKDOL7yztX7PwUtdbFA1Q7NnY6ajYPlMpdpRN94NYdr2B4g2lQF8v92M/ENz9KwyjfCIjVRvNidcxAnIUuYj01B2xCJihvqU3jfy1okIrwrM9ZGw5HtOn3IQco02C+WR3981aLmnEEVGpo6Aal+LTPbdF+s2k8PUMOvyq2FqCafDCUoVy8jjW+VSKwKmTNw== X-YMail-OSG: qTw3EH4VM1np0Kv_4o4K3FM2G01c7GPR4xMbGBrP4CGN6OfMzaizqWQTiUuGlpW Pp3sWtuirew9_zYMtm7Qq2T8qdB3UQImMUqavtugLd_gnZKE.ZXIcauNeT3pQKoLp.tTLb..2g7a bcjntXrUwSDdqDdt81gtQkPWxIwHfrNXcUmOggGdKh39WAX54W08hId9Qmy03311ROy1.I9OAVpo KrRcZ4LgNT5RQeG9nvZ7c7hUfvEWY4SW0XNWWDAMnaX8OHUnK9ESq7QtjTNZwAATtVwiMl0lC.pc BsGzv6zBkjYXxCwQouZDK3yz7o2fbdDoT4feAjIUCQZUzTn20tVx.nRtdT0qp0OQPvF6Z120N6O9 RNooHcEFEDEKV5IwXihIx8qwTXLDsxA2u0FESlY2.a2HSIPQvS1Q0g25zK16P9NnCKRymxpJab_O wdYHRpHjQhTQrJ0IFkc7xRumMBrxlH7cA2pkWLVj7E5yUX20pHgvXoryOuvmo3W2Msv3r6CRTtVW _5D9Xpth7Fa6XdrBcRHo0zv9WwO_nwxN9qqLXl6kNAYT01O2gI2N4mcwXtsOil13JoknBsUtbosu VHMX8nqcQzHvogZd5bhc840EN3dEf...4XG5RLeq.2FbggCU9g3pGsaFqF94ekT27flRfT_TlSdI c_kh_ISPb23gHqKyiaNdVfGjameZvFJCSMiaaTeR6up3.fOOfy2S57CmccfkIrppJjNLGTUHhBbN 7qm7BbMaWlULjFH4DXDrTag4kmW_VCOxWdxiv6ifEk0TpdoTbqLUAXZct6ymTyqdC3E54SH.o3Vy ctKeAadyf1DgVIvUJmesD46NJK2RNenWMgnDM_iHXB Original-Received: from sonic.gate.mail.ne1.yahoo.com by sonic314.consmr.mail.bf2.yahoo.com with HTTP; Sun, 13 Sep 2020 12:53:37 +0000 Original-Received: by smtp423.mail.ir2.yahoo.com (VZM Hermes SMTP Server) with ESMTPA ID f4fbf5bdd120e57dad95979bd1a27ba7; Sun, 13 Sep 2020 12:53:37 +0000 (UTC) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87y2lerlhl.fsf@gkayaalp.com> X-Mailer: WebService/1.1.16583 mail.backend.jedi.jws.acl:role.jedi.acl.token.atz.jws.hermes.aol Apache-HttpAsyncClient/4.1.4 (Java/11.0.7) Received-SPF: pass client-ip=74.6.132.123; envelope-from=spacibba@aol.com; helo=sonic314-13.consmr.mail.bf2.yahoo.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/09/13 08:53:37 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 3.11 and newer [fuzzy] X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:255472 Archived-At: On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 01:59:02PM +0300, Göktuğ Kayaalp wrote: >On 2020-09-13 13:30 +03, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote: >> On a more serious note, what I wanted to point out is that there >> are many forces shaping what is currently perceived as "usage >> friendly". Some of them stem from ergonomy research (which, of >> course, focuses on some population already exposed to software >> "out there", so it's part of a feedback loop), some of it stems >> from some manufacturer's attempt to differentiate itself, to >> grow sales, some of it, even, from a strategy of appealing to >> potential decision takers (who are /not/ those who have to use >> the sofware later). > >A lot of that research is pseudo scientific. E.g. some famous >‘principles’ of UX design are based on academesified opition or >misappropriation of unrelated research. E.g. see this one [1]. If you >read the ‘scientific’ background to the ‘laws’, what you’ll see is that >some of those are shaky, and some of those are lesser than that. > >We should focus on what makes users *stay* with Emacs, and what makes >such a stay comfortable. While I see no harm in making the first steps >easier---so long as it’s reasonably backwards compatible---, I firmly >believe that Emacs is a piece of software users should come to with a >knowledge of what to expect. That’s not to mean it should be difficult, >as some are tending to interpret, but that Emacs constitutes a certain >paradigm of computing, and that that’s the main thing it has to offer. > >As an example---tho it’s inevitably a single data point---I’ve never >been a user who is unable to figure out how to change the theme or >modify something in Emacs. But I’ve only came to stick with it when I >uncovered what _actually_ it has to offer, over some keybindings and >random customisation. It should also be considered how so many users >stick to Emacs despite it’s apparent that they are pretty much aware >that many other editors are way easier than Emacs, for some measure of >easy, and yet they stick to Emacs, despite the unfamiliarity, despite >the supposed difficulty. > >We’re asking "why people aren’t coming to Emacs in hordes" too much, >when "why are people using Emacs in the first place" is the more >important one. > I would make also these questions: Why the vanilla emacs users almost hasn't increased or has decreases if the number of programmers has exponentially grow in the world? And being emacs so powerful and old; how is it possible that it is frequently not even listed in the GNU/Linux popular editors articles or it is back in the list? The emacs popularity is so low these days (even in GNU/Linux users) that some distros still comes with emacs 24. And if we split spacemacs and doom apart it is almost negligible... we are even after vim. How the emacs modifications (specially spacemacs) have found a set of frequent developers, and a big younger community? (which is not bigger because it is a bit overloaded of external packages IMO) How is it possible that all those dummy and young editors have multiple times more users and community than Emacs when they don't really bring anything much better than us? Are we sure we don't need that "fresh air", "new ideas" and "lot of work" to be happening in vanilla directly? Even if we (former users) disagree with some of them and have to add 3, 4 or 10 extra lines to our config to disable them? I think that when emacs was created it was a revolutionary thing; it brought an "easier" way to do "complex" things in that time's standard and broke many paradigms. Why now we constantly insist in "paradigm of computing" and "historic reasons" or "because in the 90's ..."? I am a big supporter of backward compatibility, but sometimes the problem becomes "evolve or die". Every software has a complex social part; and part of that is to satisfy general user's needs (because not all the users must be programmers and even not all programmers have to be lisp programmers or understand the emacs internals). Just a recent example: It's worth nothing to have a better technical feature if most of the users prefer something else or don't really care the benefits if they sacrifice simplicity (like for example undo) or don't know about them or are used to, and like something else. OTOH the strong positions about having a normal undo-redo in vanilla ()even not by default for years and trying to enforce the user to follow our "technically better paradigm" just made that alternative buggy undo-redo implementations grow like mushrooms; some of them with bad implementations and giving a bad experience to final users. One of the things we must understand is that even not all developers need to be programmers, know lisp or understand the benefits of undo over undo-redo. We need help with the documentation, the web sites, sysadmins, designers, web designers, javascript, CSS and the other beasts, even youtubers, publishers and journalists etc. And is more probable that all those help here if they can do part of their work in emacs; even if they have no idea about lisp, packages, and prefer a black screen and CUA mode. It's my opinion. >[1] https://lawsofux.com/ > >-- >İ. Göktuğ Kayaalp / @cadadr / >pgp: 024C 30DD 597D 142B 49AC 40EB 465C D949 B101 2427 >