Re: [Emacs-diffs] emacs-25 e5c17f4: Fix todo-mode category movement

Re: [Emacs-diffs] emacs-25 e5c17f4: Fix todo-mode category movement

[John Wiegley]

>>>>> Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@gmx.net> writes:

> branch: emacs-25
> commit e5c17f46785e2eca165ccd5aa890f212c6a61ca1
> Author: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@gmx.net>
> Commit: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@gmx.net>

>     Fix todo-mode category movement

Hi Stephen, did this address an open issue? Any fixes applied to emacs-25 at
this point so reference the bug they fix, so I can refer to them. Otherwise,
I'm not sure who raised the issue, or why it needs to be addressed before
release.

Thanks,
-- 
John Wiegley                  GPG fingerprint = 4710 CF98 AF9B 327B B80F
http://newartisans.com                          60E1 46C4 BD1A 7AC1 4BA2

Re: [Emacs-diffs] emacs-25 e5c17f4: Fix todo-mode category movement

[Stephen Berman]

On Sat, 26 Mar 2016 16:17:41 -0700 John Wiegley <jwiegley@gmail.com> wrote:

>>>>>> Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@gmx.net> writes:
>
>> branch: emacs-25
>> commit e5c17f46785e2eca165ccd5aa890f212c6a61ca1
>> Author: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@gmx.net>
>> Commit: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@gmx.net>
>
>>     Fix todo-mode category movement
>
> Hi Stephen, did this address an open issue? Any fixes applied to emacs-25 at
> this point so reference the bug they fix, so I can refer to them. Otherwise,
> I'm not sure who raised the issue, or why it needs to be addressed before
> release.

This was a bug I encountered yesterday while using todo-mode.  It was
clearly broken behavior, so I assumed the fix should go to emacs-25, and
since I'm the todo-mode maintainer, I thought it was all right to commit
the fix without filing a bug report.  Would you prefer me to make a bug
report first in such cases?  To be sure, the bug existed since I added
this version of todo-mode to the Emacs repository almost three years
ago, so it's not a regression; yet it was clearly a bug.  If I encounter
another such bug in todo-mode should I wait for approval from a core
maintainer to commit to emacs-25?

Steve Berman

Re: [Emacs-diffs] emacs-25 e5c17f4: Fix todo-mode category movement

[John Wiegley]

>>>>> Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@gmx.net> writes:

> Would you prefer me to make a bug report first in such cases?
>
> If I encounter another such bug in todo-mode should I wait for approval from
> a core maintainer to commit to emacs-25?

Unless it's truly a trivial change, yes please.  Thanks!

-- 
John Wiegley                  GPG fingerprint = 4710 CF98 AF9B 327B B80F
http://newartisans.com                          60E1 46C4 BD1A 7AC1 4BA2

todo-mode doc bug (was: [Emacs-diffs] emacs-25 e5c17f4: Fix todo-mode category movement)

[Stephen Berman]

On Sun, 03 Apr 2016 11:22:26 -0700 John Wiegley <jwiegley@gmail.com> wrote:

>>>>>> Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@gmx.net> writes:
>
>> Would you prefer me to make a bug report first in such cases?
>>
>> If I encounter another such bug in todo-mode should I wait for approval from
>> a core maintainer to commit to emacs-25?
>
> Unless it's truly a trivial change, yes please.  Thanks!

I'm not sure what counts as trivial, and now have reason to ask for
clarification.  Specifically, I noticed that the doc string of
`todo-show' is in part obsolete and incorrect -- in fact, it already was
when I initially committed this version of todo-mode to the Emacs
repository, because I had failed to update the doc string after making
the change in ea3ae33b5b94bf095c52f279887009e8fb71a9df prior to the
initial commit.  (In contrast, the Todo mode Info manual contains the
correct information.)  Is it ok for me to commit the following doc
string change to emacs-25, and also dispense with a bug report?

Steve Berman

diff --git a/lisp/calendar/todo-mode.el b/lisp/calendar/todo-mode.el
index 9574c03..0529e97 100644
--- a/lisp/calendar/todo-mode.el
+++ b/lisp/calendar/todo-mode.el
@@ -612,11 +612,12 @@ todo-completion-ignore-case
 (defun todo-show (&optional solicit-file interactive)
   "Visit a todo file and display one of its categories.
 
-When invoked in Todo mode, prompt for which todo file to visit.
-When invoked outside of Todo mode with non-nil prefix argument
-SOLICIT-FILE prompt for which todo file to visit; otherwise visit
-`todo-default-todo-file'.  Subsequent invocations from outside
-of Todo mode revisit this file or, with option
+When invoked in Todo mode, Todo Archive mode or Todo Filtered
+Items mode, or when invoked anywhere else with a prefix argument,
+prompt for which todo file to visit.  When invoked outside of a
+Todo mode buffer without a prefix argument, visit
+`todo-default-todo-file'.  Subsequent invocations from outside of
+Todo mode revisit this file or, with option
 `todo-show-current-file' non-nil (the default), whichever todo
 file was last visited.
 
@@ -643,10 +644,7 @@ todo-show
 by default.  The done items are hidden, but typing
 `\\[todo-toggle-view-done-items]' displays them below the todo
 items.  With non-nil user option `todo-show-with-done' both todo
-and done items are always shown on visiting a category.
-
-Invoking this command in Todo Archive mode visits the
-corresponding todo file, displaying the corresponding category."
+and done items are always shown on visiting a category."
   (interactive "P\np")
   (when todo-default-todo-file
     (todo-check-file (todo-absolute-file-name todo-default-todo-file)))

Re: todo-mode doc bug (was: [Emacs-diffs] emacs-25 e5c17f4: Fix todo-mode category movement)

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@gmx.net>
> Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 11:56:15 +0200
> 
> I'm not sure what counts as trivial, and now have reason to ask for
> clarification.  Specifically, I noticed that the doc string of
> `todo-show' is in part obsolete and incorrect -- in fact, it already was
> when I initially committed this version of todo-mode to the Emacs
> repository, because I had failed to update the doc string after making
> the change in ea3ae33b5b94bf095c52f279887009e8fb71a9df prior to the
> initial commit.  (In contrast, the Todo mode Info manual contains the
> correct information.)  Is it ok for me to commit the following doc
> string change to emacs-25, and also dispense with a bug report?

Doc string corrections are always okay (assuming you are sure they are
correct).  I have no opinion about closing the bug.

Thanks.

Re: todo-mode doc bug

[Stephen Berman]

On Mon, 25 Apr 2016 13:03:09 +0300 Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:

>> From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@gmx.net>
>> Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 11:56:15 +0200
>> 
>> I'm not sure what counts as trivial, and now have reason to ask for
>> clarification.  Specifically, I noticed that the doc string of
>> `todo-show' is in part obsolete and incorrect -- in fact, it already was
>> when I initially committed this version of todo-mode to the Emacs
>> repository, because I had failed to update the doc string after making
>> the change in ea3ae33b5b94bf095c52f279887009e8fb71a9df prior to the
>> initial commit.  (In contrast, the Todo mode Info manual contains the
>> correct information.)  Is it ok for me to commit the following doc
>> string change to emacs-25, and also dispense with a bug report?
>
> Doc string corrections are always okay (assuming you are sure they are
> correct).  

Thanks for the clarification.

>            I have no opinion about closing the bug.

There is no outstanding bug about this; my question was about whether it
is necessary to file one for this doc string change, and it was prompted
by John's post in response to my previous todo-mode (non-doc) bug fix,
which I had committed to emacs-25 without a prior bug report (since I am
the todo-mode maintainer and had found the bug myself).

Steve Berman

Re: todo-mode doc bug

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@gmx.net>
> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 12:18:33 +0200
> 
> >            I have no opinion about closing the bug.
> 
> There is no outstanding bug about this; my question was about whether it
> is necessary to file one for this doc string change

No need.  However, mentioning in the commit log the URL for the
discussion of the issue should be considered.

Thanks.

Re: todo-mode doc bug

[Stephen Berman]

(Sorry for the lag in responding; I was detained by more pressing
obligations.)

On Mon, 25 Apr 2016 13:23:03 +0300 Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:

>> From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@gmx.net>
>> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
>> Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 12:18:33 +0200
>> 
>> >            I have no opinion about closing the bug.
>> 
>> There is no outstanding bug about this; my question was about whether it
>> is necessary to file one for this doc string change
>
> No need.  However, mentioning in the commit log the URL for the
> discussion of the issue should be considered.

This thread is the only discussion of this issue, so in the hope that
you agree with me that it isn't relevant to the doc bug per se and hence
wouldn't be appropriate to reference in the commit message, I've gone
ahead and committed the fix without such a reference.

Steve Berman

Re: todo-mode doc bug

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@gmx.net>
> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2016 10:19:55 +0200
> 
> >> There is no outstanding bug about this; my question was about whether it
> >> is necessary to file one for this doc string change
> >
> > No need.  However, mentioning in the commit log the URL for the
> > discussion of the issue should be considered.
> 
> This thread is the only discussion of this issue, so in the hope that
> you agree with me that it isn't relevant to the doc bug per se and hence
> wouldn't be appropriate to reference in the commit message, I've gone
> ahead and committed the fix without such a reference.

I often wonder why people need to assume something about what others
think, instead of just asking them and waiting for an answer.  What's
the rush?

As it happens, I don't agree.  In this message:

  http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2016-04/msg00738.html

you say more about the rationale for the fix than in the log message
for the commit you just made:

  Specifically, I noticed that the doc string of
  `todo-show' is in part obsolete and incorrect -- in fact, it already was
  when I initially committed this version of todo-mode to the Emacs
  repository, because I had failed to update the doc string after making
  the change in ea3ae33b5b94bf095c52f279887009e8fb71a9df prior to the
  initial commit.  (In contrast, the Todo mode Info manual contains the
  correct information.)

Admittedly, I'm close to splitting hair here, but the references to a
previous commit and to the manual are valuable and relevant
information.

That's why I generally advise to abandon doubt and simply include the
reference in the log message, as no real harm could ever be done by
doing that.

Thanks.

Re: todo-mode doc bug

[Stephen Berman]

On Wed, 27 Apr 2016 11:50:02 +0300 Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:

>> From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@gmx.net>
>> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
>> Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2016 10:19:55 +0200
>> 
>> >> There is no outstanding bug about this; my question was about whether it
>> >> is necessary to file one for this doc string change
>> >
>> > No need.  However, mentioning in the commit log the URL for the
>> > discussion of the issue should be considered.
>> 
>> This thread is the only discussion of this issue, so in the hope that
>> you agree with me that it isn't relevant to the doc bug per se and hence
>> wouldn't be appropriate to reference in the commit message, I've gone
>> ahead and committed the fix without such a reference.
>
> I often wonder why people need to assume something about what others
> think, instead of just asking them and waiting for an answer.  What's
> the rush?

Sorry.  I thought asking for further clarification of what you meant by
"discussion of the issue" was out of proportion to the significance of
this doc bug; in future I'll try to be less restrained.

> As it happens, I don't agree.  In this message:
>
>   http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2016-04/msg00738.html
>
> you say more about the rationale for the fix than in the log message
> for the commit you just made:
>
>   Specifically, I noticed that the doc string of
>   `todo-show' is in part obsolete and incorrect -- in fact, it already was
>   when I initially committed this version of todo-mode to the Emacs
>   repository, because I had failed to update the doc string after making
>   the change in ea3ae33b5b94bf095c52f279887009e8fb71a9df prior to the
>   initial commit.  (In contrast, the Todo mode Info manual contains the
>   correct information.)
>
> Admittedly, I'm close to splitting hair here, but the references to a
> previous commit and to the manual are valuable and relevant
> information.
>
> That's why I generally advise to abandon doubt and simply include the
> reference in the log message, as no real harm could ever be done by
> doing that.

It didn't occur to me that you meant that specific message (it would
have be clear to me if you had referred directly to it rather than to
"discussion of the issue", but it's my fault for not asking for further
clarification.)  I guess the only repair it to revert my commit and then
make a new one with the reference.  Should I do that?

Steve Berman

Re: todo-mode doc bug

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@gmx.net>
> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2016 11:22:31 +0200
> 
> It didn't occur to me that you meant that specific message

I didn't.  I haven't read the discussion until you said it didn't
contain anything useful.  I just gave the advice because referencing
the thread is cheap and can never cause any information loss.  It's
just something I learned from experience, that's all.

> I guess the only repair it to revert my commit and then make a new
> one with the reference.  Should I do that?

It doesn't look to me important enough for such troubles.

Thanks.