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: Convert README.org to plain text README while installing package Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2022 08:18:56 +0300 Message-ID: <83o7z24dof.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87leuca7v7.fsf@disroot.org> <87czfopmsd.fsf@gnu.org> <87h74ztshe.fsf@gmx.de> <871qw31ois.fsf@yahoo.com> <8735gj4ceo.fsf@gnu.org> <87ee038ipt.fsf@gmx.de> <87o7z61v59.fsf@gmail.com> <87bkv527p5.fsf@gmail.com> <835yld93w7.fsf@gnu.org> <877d5t0yrn.fsf@gmail.com> <83o7z47m7y.fsf@gnu.org> <87ilpaevi3.fsf@gmail.com> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="18230"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: acm@muc.de, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Tim Cross Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Jun 09 07:21:54 2022 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 1nzAcD-0004aB-O1 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 09 Jun 2022 07:21:53 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53184 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nzAcC-0001qL-AF for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 09 Jun 2022 01:21:52 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:59868) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nzAZU-0000nS-18 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 09 Jun 2022 01:19:04 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:48310) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nzAZT-0004kO-LN; Thu, 09 Jun 2022 01:19:03 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=Iy1X0LnzPCtH3xc59rDZCTRFQL7BJR+56emafM7x25g=; b=kGQbs/7+mvn4 ozJIdABgOrFyedmD4R+5FU++WL40hyXFSiPlKhSED0xit9IzN9BWq1jhQjwLyBMfQimX4TwBAQ/mq cpiPMHPyC6+kpVgJxhbH/W7MJW47NiINOwmcmc4bFc2iqyHAUq0hBKNEmSTpUeSG1WNRAN7m3vJFP NkwfjJG4V3lXa7KC4m2x7DVpzV0yNVbv9FY+D2tiDnyjbcUsjBjQ6axvXrtEo7Q02F/vd+uWnsu9k inQZk+UNVvpYJR2YHjSxBZHrhavaStxgl4VpOaMvG8VUHKi/aHiEvwX6xHd8X1reY4yddYNF7Hpac SZTzeOvvy8e1XB68mVtmjQ==; Original-Received: from [87.69.77.57] (port=4648 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nzAZR-0004xR-Hd; Thu, 09 Jun 2022 01:19:02 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87ilpaevi3.fsf@gmail.com> (message from Tim Cross on Thu, 09 Jun 2022 05:34:09 +1000) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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:290959 Archived-At: > From: Tim Cross > Cc: acm@muc.de, emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2022 05:34:09 +1000 > > > ??? How is remapping "not new"? It takes some very common Emacs > > commands and redirects them to different commands. E.g., 'open-line' > > now does something quite different. This means the user should either > > go learn what the Org commands do, or be prepared to be surprised. > > This are not new key bindings, they are redefinitions of existing key > bindings to make them work in an org mode context in a wayu which is > consistent with user expectations. That's exactly my point: suddenly commands that I'm familiar with are working in ways that are different, even if slightly different. A conscientious Emacs user will want/need to study the differences, before using those remapped commands. > They are not new in the sense of them being a key binding which did > not exist prior to loading org mode. This completely misses the point I explain above. The _commands_ behave differently, and that is all that counts. > >> Any bindings relating to babel, todo management, time management, > >> agendas etc have no relevance when reading a readme.org file. > > > > Then why does Org define them in that case? > > because standard org mode is not typically used in read only buffers. Which is one more argument towards more modularity in Org, so that only the relevant bindings and commands are defined for each use case. > As to whether defining 200 key bindings is too many - well I don't think > you can possibly say either way without significantly more analysis. Which is why I suggested you do this kind of analysis. > It also isn't at all given that adding 200 new key bindings in a new > mode is of itself problematic. There could be very good reasons to > add that many bindings. You have just explained that many of them are not relevant, even for editing simple enough Org files. For example, everything related to org-babel -- why do these bindings have to be available by default? Many Org files have no code blocks at all. > Besides, I'm not sure it even is a problem. Emacs has lots of key > bindings - the vast majority of which I never use. I don't find this > a problem and I'm not convinced just citing absolute binding numbers > in itself is evidence of a problem. Well, I _am_ convinced, looking at this from the POV of the Emacs maintainer. I also think almost everyone agrees that too many unneeded keybindings are a problem in general -- witness the removal of some veteran global bindings in recent Emacs version, which is evidence that we consider even half a dozen less-then-useful bindings not a good thing.