From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Tim Cross Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [External] : Re: Default custom file was: Re: Propose to add setup-wizard.el to ELPA Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2022 18:13:11 +1100 Message-ID: <87a6g8m1n1.fsf@gmail.com> References: <740A136F-8710-4F4C-BFC1-A3DB418447F4@gmail.com> <83iluzbqcr.fsf@gnu.org> <87r19nxx7x.fsf@gmail.com> <878rvv9esx.fsf@yahoo.com> <87fsq28x4l.fsf@yahoo.com> <87bl0q8vfa.fsf@yahoo.com> <83pmp69vsu.fsf@gnu.org> <8735m17l8c.fsf@yahoo.com> <875yqx5nub.fsf@yahoo.com> <83lezt8cm6.fsf@gnu.org> <871r1k38ym.fsf@gmail.com> <87ee5kmm6t.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="20158"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: mu4e 1.7.5; emacs 28.0.90 Cc: "emacs-devel@gnu.org" To: Drew Adams Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Jan 07 08:48:03 2022 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 1n5jyl-0004zQ-Bf for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 07 Jan 2022 08:48:03 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:54338 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n5jyi-00025c-9F for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 07 Jan 2022 02:48:00 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:33440) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n5juj-0000C3-JM for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 07 Jan 2022 02:43:53 -0500 Original-Received: from [2607:f8b0:4864:20::1034] (port=46965 helo=mail-pj1-x1034.google.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n5juh-0000lz-R3 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 07 Jan 2022 02:43:53 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-pj1-x1034.google.com with SMTP id rj2-20020a17090b3e8200b001b1944bad25so5692732pjb.5 for ; Thu, 06 Jan 2022 23:43:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=references:user-agent:from:to:cc:subject:date:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version; bh=ldcvod2WUeZFgnNyGjoM6YjnSVMh8t2mrvDR9X1nBLc=; b=hIaMxBkSStdmXEyUG8UA9EAjpbJ7UY2y+id4PPyRKkFizUxf/TjqH0nMbixtHV1TsO bVQjiqY7gqdNmdZ1mBiBwz2BJc3wwZtGUUGoG4YuX4QBdhoqi9RJKtEHvVtmDCCqwmNw BgBkL03Wk7wXCe6TxbSwfcbVBDqRJq6sf9kTm62lugis0omjvLeot+5xBdjM/0TTSbrK s03aXDCMW3SRAQ+T2Wzxna6/tCjOeF+wqI1pAIrfP/8cdeNCcTubMVwJNDP1xj0dqVrV /dtSLRxbyKNv4gb0Z/dUCI9Xs5TCADbJBylah6K400SmMZwYuf9SlnBDKi1uq+xG8xjN IO2Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:references:user-agent:from:to:cc:subject:date :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version; bh=ldcvod2WUeZFgnNyGjoM6YjnSVMh8t2mrvDR9X1nBLc=; b=DtfMO8OYAJzY6y53ES0YdG/8W5ij2gMgZp+0EKbEgRffbyt6QgX12qw8KGahbW9pAm Sq3CIEM6JhgQcAeHAB2Xz6YSjlE+KyqWSCSkb7emShfHZ3vguZKYd1zvLEBdGUTGyooR m9u1yV0A9OiAUHL1yMP4xA+uvECmEJypO0VqThAtjcblPSj9sgnQpnwfBaZfm+/Kxnxt xBLYB564QuXXDiRsmyt4MjiZgn2zaMS19seM6hdfAZCodjbMmLaIEHReoLTyoIj10MSe Qq2GqtqVhIk89UqpUtGEx+Krn2hRDn6ACSFrMbkyuy4rc+NJrMzOinAucK+gDicvRulN SgMw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532Snj556twdUMoQaSBirVN6JTpWehJ6tCQMj2o9cuiKVV0x6FpO UpAOTRZSFd6NOU1SqUutrptE1YaEplg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw+d2sqPs6lhCQlOdMvaz3f9jWqIOqxJhX1q/50jmw7Qz43JguSfYhlOBs5SONtLXy4p7rdjg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:d585:: with SMTP id v5mr11626330pju.124.1641541430313; Thu, 06 Jan 2022 23:43:50 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from dingbat ([124.149.107.194]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u35sm4906417pfg.157.2022.01.06.23.43.48 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 06 Jan 2022 23:43:49 -0800 (PST) In-reply-to: X-Host-Lookup-Failed: Reverse DNS lookup failed for 2607:f8b0:4864:20::1034 (failed) Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::1034; envelope-from=theophilusx@gmail.com; helo=mail-pj1-x1034.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -12 X-Spam_score: -1.3 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.3 / 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RDNS_NONE=0.793, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no 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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:284379 Archived-At: Drew Adams writes: > > Thank you for taking the time to express your > point of view clearly and in detail. Thank you for considering my points (I'm now feeling a bit like one of WB chipmunks!). >From your response, there are a couple of additional points I'd like to make to clarify some things. The reason I don't think just setting the custom file to some value really covers the full scope of the change is because in addition to that change, it will also be necessary to add code to make emacs load that file. This means either the timing of loading that file would then be up to Emacs or we would have to add some other switch to disable automatic loading to restore user control over loading that file. So already the 'simple' change proposal has added additional complexity (albeit small). There could be other corner cases I've not thought of as well, especially once we add a new 'toggle' for the loading behaviour. The change management aspects I referred to are perhaps a little subtle and are certainly hard to quantify. However, it is often way too easy to underestimate the impact of such change and identify what needs to be done to mitigate it. This impact can be especially hard to recognise when you are invested in the change. Things which need to be considered (some of which have been mentioned) include - dealing with impact on existing users - updating documentation, including manuals, howtos, faqs etc - managing the confusion that will arise due to the amount of existing and easily found information out there (stack overflow, reddit, wikki, blogs, books etc) which will be out of date and will likely cause more confusion. Just dealing with the first one will likely result in the final solution being more complex than simply setting a default custom file value, which in turn will make the other points more substantial to deal with. The above are some of the reasons I think it may be misleading to characterise the proposal as something simple. However, I would be in support if I thought this was an actual problem needing to be addressed. TO me, it really does feel more like a solution in search of a problem or at the very least, a change which will result in non-trivial effort (at various levels) when there is little evidence it is really required.