RE: Differences between ibuffer and dired

["Drew Adams" <drew.adams@oracle.com>]

> > If you really must do this kind of thing, please keep it to 
> > a minimum.  And please propose and discuss each key change
> > on its own merits.
> 
> Thats why I suggested a separate branch.  All the changes 
> could then be tried in the branch withouth inconveniencing users.

"That's why"?  Telling people to simply try a new sack of changes is not the
same as "proposing and discussing each key change".

> I also dont like the argument that a specific keymap should be kept
> because its been like that forever. I've been using Emacs 
> since 1988 and I would still much prefer good consistent keymaps to 
> inconsistent ones.

Read what I said about consistency.  There are degrees and kinds of consistency,
and no degree or kind is the be-all and end-all.  The devil is in the details.

The argument about the age of Dired is not simply an argument that what is old
is good and should never be changed.  Read what I wrote, including the part
about consistency wrt what users are used to and wrt other, non-core, code.

Read the part about "other things being equal".  No one said that any keymap
"should be kept because it's been like that forever".  You are either not
reading well or being dishonest in representing what you've read.

_Reasons_ for each binding change, please.  Just why is this or that a good
change to make?  Pick a key that you think should be changed, and support it
with an _argument_.

You seem to be only reacting, in knee-jerk fashion.  Did you actually read what
I wrote?

> > In sum:
> >
> > * Treat proposed changes on a case-by-case basis, discussing them.
> > * Respect Dired.  Respect time.  Respect user numbers.
> > * Consider consistency wrt its scope.  And remember that it 
> >   is not the only important quality.