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: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2024 17:22:51 +0300 Message-ID: <867cefeo1w.fsf@gnu.org> References: <7133BE83-064B-43A4-A193-61376605222C@dancol.org> <055E6E92-6971-409E-A106-7E0C64FEF856@dancol.org> <87bk3r22x5.fsf@yahoo.com> <746FE961-37C5-4387-8274-7D90908EE2D6@dancol.org> <8734p3219c.fsf@yahoo.com> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="18762"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: dancol@dancol.org, acm@muc.de, stefankangas@gmail.com, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Po Lu Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Jun 23 16:23:32 2024 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 1sLO7v-0004dr-NA for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 23 Jun 2024 16:23:31 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sLO7N-0002id-UN; Sun, 23 Jun 2024 10:22:57 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sLO7M-0002iT-S6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Jun 2024 10:22:56 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sLO7L-0007oJ-Ls; Sun, 23 Jun 2024 10:22:55 -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=BbHpbd2RIpQO4he25suz+1SP471zIuKrFhfNCE1bmwU=; b=SgRVNATDQY/2 Tn90VzM8sSzHgL+XsFQGV1wOEKOoo6dzetsf1+MxgA5xEqqJ7aWDMvrt4mIb93GXKom+tJTBvM7gz MilPJZJA0IEu2k6vLLUtginn1hgbJJzxcHeVXIHGdZYEnt1afYXBqVLry1EbvMpkoPNZzTd7sr6ge pnyDYC66wxxJwKPEm8z8FYxGPw7wuGRZA1Map9gYC7qErYhnE5WispLoFwT8RC5W6UzalWbzEdrmh iGcsmPigYVg54ovqWXUPvqqZkEAPAFV+ZJ0OFOisrMXHEB041c627ETNsm+4CvM9E3PDmWLrNV6SF u8c+lPT8T9+261lsbWEChA==; In-Reply-To: <8734p3219c.fsf@yahoo.com> (message from Po Lu on Sun, 23 Jun 2024 22:15:59 +0800) 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:320536 Archived-At: > From: Po Lu > Cc: Alan Mackenzie , Stefan Kangas , > Stefan Monnier , emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2024 22:15:59 +0800 > > Daniel Colascione writes: > > > I don't trust that many such users exist, and even if they did, > > providing default keybindings for these keys will not somehow override > > the keybindings you install yourself. > > Sure. And more users stand to benefit from Windmove commands if they > are bound to C-x 4, than if they were required to bind such commands > themselves, commands defined by a package that is already of marginal > interest? What extraordinary logic! > > > This attitude is why Doom Emacs exists. A live software project is one > > that changes. A dead one prioritizes stasis over user experience. > > Since Doom Emacs exists and is Free Software, why are users not at > liberty to install it and bid farewell to reaction and "stasis" in Emacs > development? And why is it a matter for our consideration whether we > fail or succeed in competing with them? Any mention of "competition" > with an Emacs package is already a contradiction in terms. > > > Nothing we're talking about here will disturb your custom > > keybindings. Your experience will work just as it did before. The only > > difference is that users who don't have custom bindings for the arrow > > keys under C-x 4 will get windmove functionality if they don't > > customize the bindings. > > Spoken like a true intellectual, in the face of a real-life example to > the contrary. This dispute begins to spill into the not-so-nice area, so I think it is time for those who already made their opinions abundantly clear to stop, and let people who have not yet spoken do so. It is clear that Daniel thought years ago we should have key bindings for windmove, and still thinks so, and Stefan Monnier agrees with him. It is also clear that Alan and Po Lu think we shouldn't. Now let's hear from others, and please leave it to the Emacs maintainers to decide what to do with this after we've heard enough opinions.