From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Results of C-x C-q poll Date: 09 Jul 2002 00:06:37 +0200 Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <5xfzyt98nm.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> References: <1025459292.4840.7.camel@eagle> <200207062204.g66M4es09015@rum.cs.yale.edu> <1026035665.4840.82.camel@eagle> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1026162424 13279 127.0.0.1 (8 Jul 2002 21:07:04 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2002 21:07:04 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Stefan Monnier , emacs-devel@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 17Rfiq-0003S4-00 for ; Mon, 08 Jul 2002 23:07:04 +0200 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 17Rfqw-0007E1-00 for ; Mon, 08 Jul 2002 23:15:27 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17Rfiu-0006QF-00; Mon, 08 Jul 2002 17:07:08 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.filanet.dk ([195.215.206.179]) by fencepost.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17Rfhp-0006Lg-00; Mon, 08 Jul 2002 17:06:02 -0400 Original-Received: from kfs2.cua.dk.cua.dk (unknown [10.1.82.3]) by mail.filanet.dk (Postfix) with SMTP id A08147C016; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 21:05:59 +0000 (GMT) Original-To: Andre Spiegel In-Reply-To: <1026035665.4840.82.camel@eagle> Original-Lines: 25 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3.50 Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:5581 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:5581 Andre Spiegel writes: > On Sun, 2002-07-07 at 00:04, Stefan Monnier wrote: > > > But then again, maybe just popping a message is enough, > > and I'll just have to get used to hitting `C-x v v' (instead of > > C-x C-q) in order to make my VC-controlled buffers writable. > > I will install such a change. Although I like the C-x C-q binding very > much, I think I have to agree with Richard that removing it (and only > displaying a message) is the solution that does the best to reconcile > the conflicting opinions. > > For those die-hard C-x C-q users (and I'm one of them), there will still > be the option to bind it to vc-toggle-read-only, which will continue to > exist. That will be fine with me. But what about my suggestion that C-u C-x C-q does just toggle-read-only instead of the current behaviour which is also available on C-u C-x v v in case it is needed (I rarely - if ever - needed it myself). -- Kim F. Storm http://www.cua.dk