From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Gregory Heytings Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Suggested experimental test Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2021 20:22:21 +0000 Message-ID: <271290d7aa69bbcaa204@heytings.org> References: <831ba60af0cbfdd95686@heytings.org> <87mtuxj8ue.fsf@gnus.org> <9088e12cb3de3d30abf1@heytings.org> <8735wnjsum.fsf@gnus.org> <83sg4n9jei.fsf@gnu.org> <271290d7aac58f2f9e96@heytings.org> <83czvr9hvc.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="4401"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: larsi@gnus.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Mar 22 21:23:57 2021 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 1lOR5h-00012h-9s for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 22 Mar 2021 21:23:57 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39510 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lOR5g-0006w2-Bu for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 22 Mar 2021 16:23:56 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:60476) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lOR4E-0005sD-EQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 22 Mar 2021 16:22:26 -0400 Original-Received: from heytings.org ([95.142.160.155]:41160) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lOR4C-0007Pv-Et; Mon, 22 Mar 2021 16:22:26 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=heytings.org; s=20210101; t=1616444541; bh=MU6iEivtQtu6sJwxGuGPWZKxkPJG9Q7i5+TnheJ7KaE=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:References:From; b=XIYCVAWbH9caE6i4BN+9DePwqlEsnh+qInhLGZ6HMVlzDwmvHxeTaabInTx9KD5YZ AgCau80TbtrKkkWmFqlARiv6qRLhBq/dKHUTJvony6hghlG9txehHSH+Lcsk2XmxJr 9u6Yvx1hMyvAZwMKHD9Sl2tq27FTnYF+YGesIm8O1F93K0IC1stlhz3ZlSRf/fXGDP 2Lg0yod7T5bWB+bjVVeTAJrHPIwxtAjqN+wRAONg+of8du3VUjp6TQgQWnkwIcGdHt tnlPwTW591H+h/G3ErN1lTCx/WOlVRnEedCF6jg0lxbLFoX7aLocseynDR24vjbHSw zp9m+ke9eUv/g== In-Reply-To: <83czvr9hvc.fsf@gnu.org> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=95.142.160.155; envelope-from=gregory@heytings.org; helo=heytings.org 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, SPF_HELO_PASS=-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:266818 Archived-At: >>>> I don't use `C-o' myself, so I can't really say to what degree this >>>> would be annoying or not for users. Any `C-o' users who have an >>>> opinion here? >>> >>> I use it _a_lot_. >> >> But of course, as you said a month ago: >> >>> This question also goes to everyone else in this long dispute who >>> wants their precious key bindings preserved: why is such a long >>> discussion needed when it is so easy to restore, in your init file, a >>> binding you want preserved? > > Sure. But what I wrote then didn't prevent you-all from flooding this > list with precisely the discussions I tried to prevent. > I'm sorry for this, that's not what I wanted. What would be the way to conduct such an experiment without provoking such a flooding, for those who do not have write access to the trunk? IMO Emacs is now in a position that is similar to that of Emacs 16, when RMS introduced modes. He realized that he needed a prefix key for them, and he did not choose to use one of the yet unused meta keys: instead he repurposed C-c and moved its command somewhere else. The need for such a prefix key is something that he could not have envisioned while writing Emacs 1, it became apparent only later. Likewise, some time later, when user configuration files became common, the C-c LETTER keys were freed. Again the need for this could not have been seen beforehand, and again RMS did not choose to use a free meta key for this. Now the situation is that third-party packages are becoming more and more popular, something which couldn't have been envisioned twenty years ago, and these packages can't be installed in a simple way, that is, without asking users to fiddle with their configuration files, to define some global key bindings that these packages need. I don't see why we shouldn't act in the same way RMS acted, that is, by repurposing one control key for them.