From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: `pop-up-frames' and binding/setting user options [was: Documenting buffer display] Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2018 20:01:57 +0300 Message-ID: <83k1mbtere.fsf@gnu.org> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1540141220 696 195.159.176.226 (21 Oct 2018 17:00:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2018 17:00:20 +0000 (UTC) Cc: rudalics@gmx.at, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Drew Adams Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Oct 21 19:00:15 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1gEH5L-0008TL-Dy for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 19:00:15 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:59679 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gEH7R-0004SL-4U for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 13:02:25 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36077) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gEH7L-0004S1-3a for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 13:02:19 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gEH7G-0000vq-54 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 13:02:19 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:60589) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gEH7G-0000vk-1X; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 13:02:14 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=3724 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1gEH7F-0008GD-Id; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 13:02:13 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Drew Adams on Sun, 21 Oct 2018 09:10:20 -0700 (PDT)) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:230547 Archived-At: > Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2018 09:10:20 -0700 (PDT) > From: Drew Adams > > > A user option has to be respected. > > A _user_ has to be respected. Yes. And they _are_ respected. I don't really understand what are you arguing about here. There's nothing wrong in deprecating certain interfaces if we find that they get in the way of Emacs development and/or maintenance. As long as the "old ways" are supported and documented, no one and nothing is harmed. You've voiced your opinion in favor of pop-up-frames etc., and against favoring display-buffer and friends, and we happen to disagree with it. There's no need to continue arguing that same argument, as the disagreement is clear. It is entirely okay for Emacs developers to try to encourage users to use the interfaces we favor, even if you happen to disagree.