From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Suggested experimental test Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2021 14:41:59 +0200 Message-ID: <831rc682js.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87mtuxj8ue.fsf@gnus.org> <9088e12cb3de3d30abf1@heytings.org> <8735wnjsum.fsf@gnus.org> <83sg4n9jei.fsf@gnu.org> <87y2efhx3e.fsf@gnus.org> <838s6f9g5d.fsf@gnu.org> <87y2efgg3w.fsf@gnus.org> <878s6fgdzu.fsf@gnus.org> <19c1ec9e-a97f-a8ab-b966-edadbc299c39@yandex.ru> <83mtuu8gdz.fsf@gnu.org> <87tup26om4.fsf@posteo.net> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="38481"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: bugs@gnu.support, emacs-devel@gnu.org, gregory@heytings.org, stefankangas@gmail.com, dgutov@yandex.ru, larsi@gnus.org To: Philip Kaludercic Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Mar 23 13:42:54 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 1lOgN3-0009u4-M0 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 13:42:53 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33192 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lOgN2-0001yM-NI for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 08:42:52 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:45268) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lOgM9-0001WN-IX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 08:41:58 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:53950) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lOgM8-0005aq-B1; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 08:41:56 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:2153 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1lOgM4-0006t3-Am; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 08:41:54 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87tup26om4.fsf@posteo.net> (message from Philip Kaludercic on Tue, 23 Mar 2021 13:28:19 +0100) 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:266870 Archived-At: > From: Philip Kaludercic > Cc: Jean Louis , larsi@gnus.org, gregory@heytings.org, > emacs-devel@gnu.org, stefankangas@gmail.com, dgutov@yandex.ru > Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2021 13:28:19 +0100 > > > That just delays the dispute to the point when we want to consider > > making some of the bindings the default. So it basically may solve a > > secondary problem -- how to conduct the experiment -- but not the main > > problem, which is whether and how to change bindings that existed in > > Emacs since about forever. > > Forgive me for asking, maybe I'm missing something, but why should the > changes be made default? The context was the discussion of changes in key bindings. If they are not changed by default, how else can such a change be made? > Isn't the idea of providing a theme to change the behaviour that users > can enable or disable them easily, without the defaults having to change? The theme suggestion was a proposal to conduct an experiment without interfering with those who want no part in the experiment. But eventually, the intent is to change the default behavior, because rebinding any key to any command is already possible, and nothing prevents users from doing that in their private init files. So having a non-default theme that makes a bunch of such rebindings makes little sense to me.