From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Morgan Willcock Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Please rename trusted-content to trusted-contents Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2024 18:01:51 +0000 Message-ID: <86seqfbnqo.fsf@ice9.digital> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="9127"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Cc: Stefan Kangas , Eli Zaretskii , rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Dec 22 19:02:34 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 1tPQHi-0002Gy-2u for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 22 Dec 2024 19:02:34 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tPQHK-0006Rb-9z; Sun, 22 Dec 2024 13:02:10 -0500 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 1tPQHE-0006R2-Ej for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 22 Dec 2024 13:02:04 -0500 Original-Received: from relay9-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.199]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tPQHB-0005tp-I7; Sun, 22 Dec 2024 13:02:04 -0500 Original-Received: by mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6ED3FFF802; Sun, 22 Dec 2024 18:01:52 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ice9.digital; s=gm1; t=1734890513; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=tvcocjAikHCI3LWi3lg7z7788Y81DQk0oReClvI1pvQ=; b=pi7ggEOLlxaXGoecdUpYAhCthxBLtRZsplJoECj6nmMuaeuql9UrUAuQ7u0O5uEBTCH/AW g1lbhoXUeBkdyznkYD3hqV+O/uV7wSf4gIIuUScQdizkuQ6PXjO/Jvkp1ei+ceY+ssubEy s6z0HWvtXS72sw0qjA0rZJB7S1eFUFK+Lil9GXvR6zka8jt8KOCC4yFehL+KROPs38W9tl 0FuhrSZOvpUBUL4wcPzQLUwFTGtqI/Z+gx0fcyHj+A91jPOIp8f3chsM14HQUWBUv2wjtt Ev/IynpxhDHicSO0MUHQkwsK9fXviRR0/xplp5euwCoB7Y98N+ChLpetzU3oeg== In-Reply-To: (Stefan Monnier's message of "Sat, 21 Dec 2024 23:48:45 -0500") X-GND-Sasl: morgan@ice9.digital Received-SPF: pass client-ip=217.70.183.199; envelope-from=morgan@ice9.digital; helo=relay9-d.mail.gandi.net X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action 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:326872 Archived-At: Stefan Monnier writes: >>>> so if he is okay with that name, we are not in a bad place. >>> I'm copying in Stefan Monnier, in case he has any comments. >> Indeed, I hesitated between `trusted-content` and `trusted-contents` but >> not long enough to learn which is right. > > OK, I tried to figure it out, but at least the info I found wasn't > very definitive. It seems to have to do with whether it's countable or > not, or whether it describe the "conceptual ideas" contained as opposed > to the actual elements contained. > I'm not sure which is more appropriate in this case and even less sure > that one of the two is wrong. > > A related question is what to do with `untrusted-content` (which is the > identifier with which I aligned mine). If we rename `trusted-content`, > we should likely rename `untrusted-content` as well (and this one > would require a backward compatibility alias). Isn't it the file path that is being configured and trusted rather than the file content(s)? I would have expected something like trusted-paths and untrusted-paths. I only speak English, but "content(s)" seems more confusing to me because another file with the same content(s) isn't necessarily going to be treated in the same way. I think similar features in other software will only refer to the settings as locations to trust. Here are two examples: https://code.visualstudio.com/docs/editor/workspace-trust https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/office/add-remove-or-change-a-trusted-location-in-microsoft-office-7ee1cdc2-483e-4cbb-bcb3-4e7c67147fb4 -- Morgan Willcock