Re: master 82ccc3a: ; Mention the previous change in NEWS

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
> From: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov@yandex.ru>
> Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2021 03:48:46 +0300
> 
> On 07.06.2021 19:55, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > I think it would be better to say something like
> > 
> >    *** Commands that use 'grep-find' now follow symlinks by default.
> 
> Not exactly: going by the option's description in the manual, it follows 
> symlinks for all arguments passed from the command line

That's easily fixed, and isn't the main point of my message.

> >    This affects the following commends: 'rgrep', ...
> > 
> > This describes the change in terms of user commands, but can you help
> > me comping up with the list of affected commands?
> 
> I don't think there's any visible change in behavior because of that 
> change. It mostly mirrored the one in 2e55201b8085 for better/uniform 
> approach to the problem.

If there's no visible change in behavior, why have this NEWS entry at
all?

> The latter change fixed ignore entries not being applied by the default 
> implementation of project-files with certain old versions of 'find'.
> 
> rgrep, which also has some ignores to handle, uses "." as the DIR 
> argument, so it should see no change.

That's just the default, right?

> xref-matches-in-directory has no known callers anymore, but any 
> third-party code should see the IGNORES honored better with those old 
> versions of 'find'.

So we could say that any command which uses xref-matches-in-directory
is affected.

> And as for following the symlinks, the existing users of 
> grep-find-template, which were changed, previously used a different 
> approach: having DIR end with '/' (hence the file-name-as-directory 
> calls which were replaced with directory-file-name calls).

Once again, if nothing's changed, why did you decide to add this
entry?  I guess you thought it had some importance.  I just think we
should better explain what have really changed, and doing that in the
terms of a not-so-simple value of an option doesn't make that clear.