From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Image mode Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 10:35:45 +0100 Message-ID: <86lkjbmxvy.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> References: <87k5yxeg19.fsf@jurta.org> <45C70ECD.70208@gmail.com> <45C72724.4000800@gmail.com> <45C78085.9080808@gmail.com> <45C84833.7070203@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1170754594 26638 80.91.229.12 (6 Feb 2007 09:36:34 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2007 09:36:34 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Juanma Barranquero , "Lennart Borgman \(gmail\)" , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Jason Rumney Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Feb 06 10:36:30 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HEMkX-00064i-KN for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 06 Feb 2007 10:36:29 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HEMkU-0003Kf-Gy for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 06 Feb 2007 04:36:26 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HEMk9-0003IO-JW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 06 Feb 2007 04:36:05 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HEMk7-0003I2-Py for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 06 Feb 2007 04:36:03 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HEMk6-0003Hv-TM for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 06 Feb 2007 04:36:02 -0500 Original-Received: from pc3.berlin.powerweb.de ([62.67.228.11]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1HEMk6-0005wD-DP for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 06 Feb 2007 04:36:02 -0500 Original-Received: from quinscape.de (pd95b0fdb.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [217.91.15.219]) by pc3.berlin.powerweb.de (8.9.3p3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA04900 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2007 10:35:57 +0100 X-Delivered-To: Original-Received: (qmail 7981 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2007 09:35:58 -0000 Original-Received: from unknown (HELO lola.quinscape.zz) ([10.0.3.43]) (envelope-sender ) by ns.quinscape.de (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 6 Feb 2007 09:35:58 -0000 Original-Received: by lola.quinscape.zz (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 70F35C19C8; Tue, 6 Feb 2007 10:35:45 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <45C84833.7070203@gnu.org> (Jason Rumney's message of "Tue\, 06 Feb 2007 09\:19\:47 +0000") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.4-2.6 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:65997 Archived-At: Jason Rumney writes: > Lennart Borgman (gmail) wrote: >>> 4) Start in C mode, image-minor-mode and not display the image >>> 7) Start in C mode and bypass image mode (major and minor) >> >> Too me 7 looks safest. Maybe 4, but I believe a hint about how to >> view the image would be better. > > You do get a hint in case 4 (which is what we do currently). > > As Emacs is primarily a text editor, not an image viewer, I don't > think that the extra step for viewing an image we have now is as bad > as some people are making out. > > Lets get on with the release and if people feel strongly enough, > redesign things properly after 22.1 is out the door. This is a new feature. We don't want it to go out the door as a misfeature or feeling that it is a security risk. I agree that we are spending too much time on discussing this. Part of the reason is that the decision rests with Richard in the end. It appears to me that his assessment differs from that of most others including myself. The typical timelag of 1 or 2 days for his participation makes it a drawnout process to get to an agreement with him, and in the meantime we spend our time infighting and venting frustration. It is not productive, but there remains little other to do at the moment, I guess. AFAICT, slow as this discussion is, it is not actually holding off the release since Richard is still busy clearing copyright matters. -- David Kastrup