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: Confused by y-or-n-p Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2021 19:05:35 +0200 Message-ID: <83pn2i0zds.fsf@gnu.org> References: <834kkcr1eo.fsf@gnu.org> <83czyvkts6.fsf@gnu.org> <87bleetirr.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <87y2hhri3n.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <83pn2tkfg8.fsf@gnu.org> <871rf7ippu.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <83a6trg6mc.fsf@gnu.org> <87im8f951f.fsf@gnus.org> <83lfdacapo.fsf@gnu.org> <83wnwsbuwp.fsf@gnu.org> <87mtxo4tph.fsf@gnus.org> <838s962iso.fsf@gnu.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="25481"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: rms@gnu.org, juri@linkov.net, rudalics@gmx.at, stefankangas@gmail.com, larsi@gnus.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org, drew.adams@oracle.com To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Jan 06 18:11:36 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 1kxCLP-0006WT-7k for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 06 Jan 2021 18:11:35 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60440 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kxCLO-0000vd-8J for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 06 Jan 2021 12:11:34 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:34898) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kxCFq-0001Xz-ES for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Jan 2021 12:05:50 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:36750) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kxCFp-00066H-Fx; Wed, 06 Jan 2021 12:05:49 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:2480 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1kxCFg-0008Pa-2v; Wed, 06 Jan 2021 12:05:40 -0500 In-Reply-To: (message from Stefan Monnier on Wed, 06 Jan 2021 11:44:26 -0500) 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:262620 Archived-At: > From: Stefan Monnier > Cc: rms@gnu.org, larsi@gnus.org, stefankangas@gmail.com, juri@linkov.net, > rudalics@gmx.at, emacs-devel@gnu.org, drew.adams@oracle.com > Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2021 11:44:26 -0500 > > >> > So I think such changes should be introduced with: > >> > - An explicit announcement. > >> > - A clear way to get back the old behavior. > >> > - A trial period in the order 2-3 months. > >> > >> Fine with me. > > > > Fine with me, if someone volunteers to do this job. Failing that, > > definitely not fine with me, as I cannot afford adding this to my > > current burden of Emacs maintenance. > > Not sure how others interpreted what I wrote, but AFAIK none of the > above three points imply extra work (just like you, I don't want extra > work). The "trial period" part is extra work: someone will have to manage that. If we are to have a rule that such a trial is required for every UI change, tracking all those trials so that they could end in time will be non-trivial. Remembering to announce such changes is also an annoying additional duty, albeit a smaller one. Basically, such a system is a lot of hassle for very little gains. Please show me another project that does something like that. > All it does is clarify that we can tentatively introduce changes > in defaults and when people complain about a change in UI, we may want > to tell them to "try it for a couple month" before deciding it should > be reverted. It wasn't clear you were proposing a trial _after_ installing a change. If people who complain about a change agree to the trial suggestion, it may work, but then what exactly did we change from what we have now? And as you well know, people who complain about this stuff want it reverted NOW.