From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: users and selection changes [was: Custom themes] Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 06:18:33 -0700 Message-ID: <20F7A620198B48BFBD9582C310C65244@us.oracle.com> References: <87r5fxnwcp.fsf@stupidchicken.com><87eibvupir.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <4CB6115E.7010304@harpegolden.net> <87zkuhv1vc.fsf@stupidchicken.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1287062350 17549 80.91.229.12 (14 Oct 2010 13:19:10 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 13:19:10 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "'Chong Yidong'" , "'David De La Harpe Golden'" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Oct 14 15:19:08 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1P6Ni6-0002cC-KP for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 15:19:07 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50124 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1P6Ni6-0008Rm-1N for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 09:19:06 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=53163 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1P6Nhy-0008Qk-3N for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 09:18:59 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1P6Nhx-0005fA-2F for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 09:18:58 -0400 Original-Received: from rcsinet10.oracle.com ([148.87.113.121]:19500) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1P6Nhw-0005f1-Si for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 09:18:57 -0400 Original-Received: from rcsinet13.oracle.com (rcsinet13.oracle.com [148.87.113.125]) by rcsinet10.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.2) with ESMTP id o9EDIrW1016170 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 14 Oct 2010 13:18:55 GMT Original-Received: from acsmt355.oracle.com (acsmt355.oracle.com [141.146.40.155]) by rcsinet13.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.1) with ESMTP id o9EDIrTI028968; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 13:18:53 GMT Original-Received: from abhmt002.oracle.com by acsmt353.oracle.com with ESMTP id 683684601287062317; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 06:18:37 -0700 Original-Received: from dradamslap1 (/10.159.228.122) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 06:18:37 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: <87zkuhv1vc.fsf@stupidchicken.com> Thread-Index: ActrV5cBdo5V6KLcQuuFGVnUjcoc1AARv5iA X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5994 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:131701 Archived-At: >> The color-adjustment themes are "look" themes rather than "feel" >> themes... I had been looking at the customisation theme >> mechanism as a way to encapsulate old vs. new selection settings > > I'm not sure this is workable. A big motivator for the selection > changes was to simplify the code in mouse.el by removing the > special-casing of mouse selections. Providing complete backward > compatibility, even as an option, would necessitate putting all the > cruft back in, which mostly defeats the purpose. Hm. We were told several times that users _would_ be able to get back exactly the pre-Emacs 24 selection behavior (at least on Windows, and I thought everywhere), and that we just had to wait patiently until the "wrinkles" were "ironed" out and we would be told how. Now you seem to be saying "Ha! we didn't really mean it; you can't get back the old behavior after all. Users are lusers." Removing bad code, with crufty special-casing, is one thing - a good thing. That isn't necessarily user-visible anyway - it's essentially code cleanup or optimization. Changing user-visible behavior is something else. And changing it in ways that are irreversible, that don't give users the choice to get back the old behavior, is something else again. And it's not what was advertised. If some of the code removed was _required_ for the previous (user-visible) behavior, then that part of what was removed was not "cruft". And there is still nothing in NEWS that describes these changes in a user-usable way, including which variables and functions have changed interfaces and how, and how to get back the previous behavior in each respect where that is possible. Listing incompatible changes is part of this: what you cannot do that you used to be able to do, etc. (See, for example, NEWS bugs #7196, #7195.)