From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: Changes for emacs 28
Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2020 17:04:25 +0300
Message-ID: <83k0x3kpw6.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <20200906133719.cu6yaldvenxubcqq.ref@Ergus>
 <20200906133719.cu6yaldvenxubcqq@Ergus> <874ko8wu8k.fsf@blind.guru>
 <83eencmj3l.fsf@gnu.org> <ebc45ef2-68c2-73c2-3192-e415ab4cd81e@yandex.ru>
Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214";
	logging-data="32922"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io"
Cc: spacibba@aol.com, mlang@blind.guru, emacs-devel@gnu.org
To: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov@yandex.ru>
Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Sep 09 16:05:11 2020
Return-path: <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org>
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 <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org>)
	id 1kG0il-0008Qa-1t
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 09 Sep 2020 16:05:11 +0200
Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53732 helo=lists1p.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1)
	(envelope-from <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org>)
	id 1kG0ik-0008Cn-5H
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 09 Sep 2020 10:05:10 -0400
Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:43608)
 by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
 (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <eliz@gnu.org>) id 1kG0i7-0007mp-F9
 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Sep 2020 10:04:31 -0400
Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:34821)
 by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1)
 (envelope-from <eliz@gnu.org>)
 id 1kG0i6-0001Hy-Mp; Wed, 09 Sep 2020 10:04:30 -0400
Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=4126 helo=home-c4e4a596f7)
 by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256)
 (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <eliz@gnu.org>)
 id 1kG0hz-0007G1-7i; Wed, 09 Sep 2020 10:04:30 -0400
In-Reply-To: <ebc45ef2-68c2-73c2-3192-e415ab4cd81e@yandex.ru> (message from
 Dmitry Gutov on Wed, 9 Sep 2020 01:06:31 +0300)
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/emacs-devel>,
 <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
 <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org
Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel"
 <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org>
Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:254868
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/254868>

> Cc: spacibba@aol.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> From: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov@yandex.ru>
> Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2020 01:06:31 +0300
> 
> On 08.09.2020 17:35, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > See, that's exactly the crux of the difficulty in these matters: ask N
> > people about changing defaults to M options, and you get the number of
> > different "please do this and this, but not that" opinions almost as
> > large as the number of permutations.
> 
> Honestly, I don't think that enabling (or not) display-line-numbers-mode 
> is going to be a big deal either way: it's easy to enable or disable, 
> and it has little far-reaching consequences otherwise.

That was only an example.

And anyway, isn't what you say above true for almost every optional
feature in Emacs?

> > So either (1) we go for the lowest common denominator of features that
> > most people agree to (which can easily be an empty set); or (2) we
> > come up with groups of optional features which are turned on and off
> > together.
> 
> Orthogonally, we could decide on a method for changing defaults which 
> doesn't involve the impossible task of making everybody happy but still 
> makes some effort to change with the times.

If this can be done, why not?  But based on past experience, I'm
skeptical, to tell the truth.