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: Mon, 04 Jan 2021 17:09:58 +0200 Message-ID: <83wnwsbuwp.fsf@gnu.org> References: <834kkcr1eo.fsf@gnu.org> <83bleinmse.fsf@gnu.org> <56435592-d2d0-5fb6-977f-01e1931da835@gmx.at> <87k0t38g1z.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <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> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="14828"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: rms@gnu.org, juri@linkov.net, rudalics@gmx.at, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, larsi@gnus.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org, drew.adams@oracle.com To: Stefan Kangas Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Jan 04 16:11:46 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 1kwRWL-0003jL-2V for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 04 Jan 2021 16:11:45 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60920 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kwRWK-0003JT-0M for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 04 Jan 2021 10:11:44 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:53648) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kwRVQ-0002WE-Bt for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Jan 2021 10:10:48 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:36207) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kwRVO-0005Mz-HE; Mon, 04 Jan 2021 10:10:46 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:2907 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1kwRUl-0005sd-Kk; Mon, 04 Jan 2021 10:10:10 -0500 In-Reply-To: (message from Stefan Kangas on Mon, 4 Jan 2021 08:54:37 +0100) 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:262433 Archived-At: > From: Stefan Kangas > Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2021 08:54:37 +0100 > Cc: juri@linkov.net, rudalics@gmx.at, Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org, > larsi@gnus.org, drew.adams@oracle.com > > [...] here's a suggestion: perhaps we should think about sometimes > carrying out time-boxed experiments on the master branch in > controversial cases. For example: we add this keybinding now, to be > revisited in 14/21/30 days and then a final discussion is taken to > keep or revert it once people have gotten some experience with it. I don't mind having such a process, provided that someone volunteers to manage it: identify and announce the relevant changes, keep track of the time-box of each one of them, initiate a discussion when the time is up, etc. It's a non-trivial amount of work.