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: [SUSPECTED SPAM] Re: [Emacs-diffs] scratch/widen-less a4ba846: Replace prog-widen with consolidating widen calls Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2017 08:53:33 +0200 Message-ID: <83po7nt6oi.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20171129233237.27462.23351@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <20171201154913.GB3840@ACM> <1e542021-e389-cca4-6acd-349efddb2652@yandex.ru> <20171201223529.GG3840@ACM> <4a94ec5c-efdd-50f1-ff4d-277f5f45c2df@yandex.ru> <83lgil1qme.fsf@gnu.org> <83d13x1j2s.fsf@gnu.org> <34abea95-c7f7-e8fa-8407-8c2fd2a4cfe1@yandex.ru> <83y3mkzw1n.fsf@gnu.org> <83mv2zzv7z.fsf@gnu.org> <83o9nexy48.fsf@gnu.org> <83d13uxug5.fsf@gnu.org> <41e3f343-816f-d2db-6575-6ef43d54957f@yandex.ru> <838tecuqjb.fsf@gnu.org> <83609guppd.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1512888867 17587 195.159.176.226 (10 Dec 2017 06:54:27 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2017 06:54:27 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, dgutov@yandex.ru To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Dec 10 07:54:23 2017 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 1eNvVH-0004Qv-9p for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 10 Dec 2017 07:54:23 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:43664 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eNvVO-00031o-Hy for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 10 Dec 2017 01:54:30 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33936) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eNvUn-00031j-Cy for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Dec 2017 01:53:54 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eNvUj-00039T-8q for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Dec 2017 01:53:53 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:43717) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eNvUj-00039J-55; Sun, 10 Dec 2017 01:53:49 -0500 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=1768 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1eNvUi-0004sI-JE; Sun, 10 Dec 2017 01:53:49 -0500 In-reply-to: (message from Stefan Monnier on Sun, 10 Dec 2017 00:01:32 -0500) 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:220844 Archived-At: > From: Stefan Monnier > Cc: dgutov@yandex.ru, emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2017 00:01:32 -0500 > > > Just to make myself clear: these reasons would have been very relevant > > and serious if we were now considering the prog-indentation-context > > stuff for inclusion in Emacs. But we are 2 years past that stage, so > > other considerations take precedence, I think. > > Could we just mark them as obsolete in Emacs-26? Doesn't sound like a good idea to me: something that was introduced recently and barely had any chance to be used doesn't fall under the "obsolete" label for me. What's the damage of having it with us for a while, and using it in our own sources?