From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Oleh Krehel Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Adding a few more finder keywords Date: Tue, 09 Jun 2015 16:47:48 +0200 Message-ID: <87zj49kkff.fsf@gmail.com> References: <87sia2l04r.fsf@gmail.com> <873821xzon.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <048d389e-cd09-468e-b93f-729505e56ab0@default> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1433861678 29135 80.91.229.3 (9 Jun 2015 14:54:38 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2015 14:54:38 +0000 (UTC) Cc: "Stephen J. Turnbull" , Stefan Monnier , Artur Malabarba , emacs-devel To: Drew Adams Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jun 09 16:54:37 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Z2KvD-00079a-Pc for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 09 Jun 2015 16:54:35 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35514 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z2KvC-0001yi-Qy for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 09 Jun 2015 10:54:34 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45482) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z2Kux-0001yB-Sx for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Jun 2015 10:54:21 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z2Kuu-0002DL-NR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Jun 2015 10:54:19 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-wi0-x234.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c05::234]:34765) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z2Kuu-0002Ck-DU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Jun 2015 10:54:16 -0400 Original-Received: by wibut5 with SMTP id ut5so21228474wib.1 for ; Tue, 09 Jun 2015 07:54:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-type; bh=eXAKndrIQWD6zY+GsKA7rhZNfgJFI2DAtRTRoJmZp1c=; b=GRo+Dcgw6vwWlUwWwlh6zE9kh8X+/VIGJEp+TnL7LBdu91xS4+3RGpZZOW6PN+q1H/ 7xfYPvGzAYfaUG64JbDczy3XI/sve8b0veQTlTW55B/HRtwMBAFy8LoRmkIpFHZlk4cq o/uuCua3LOmMMO9glfJwsqsKROlBjChFqynJhUwmM4bjJPVUEs8Pv26lgf5rNW6U90NN jr7L4dC2pJbPFSX7U1udWXRbemmggHX6D1b1lnNTSupROiji89jm3QOpr/AU0x6DgAOm YRKl5inxMLOSAsADGwLI35eacIXMiSFqWmAK4pxhnB55N8VeIcKtGhobAWWhyedXv+BY HhBw== X-Received: by 10.180.99.69 with SMTP id eo5mr32197740wib.92.1433861655581; Tue, 09 Jun 2015 07:54:15 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from firefly (dyn069045.nbw.tue.nl. [131.155.69.45]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id kc4sm9805879wjc.2.2015.06.09.07.54.14 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 09 Jun 2015 07:54:14 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <048d389e-cd09-468e-b93f-729505e56ab0@default> (Drew Adams's message of "Tue, 9 Jun 2015 07:22:59 -0700 (PDT)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2a00:1450:400c:c05::234 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:187125 Archived-At: Drew Adams writes: > Again, let it do those things with a new file-header keyword. > If some of the things finder will do are the same, then let it > do them with both `Keywords:' and the new file-header keyword. > IOW, to the extent that some part of the updated finder does not > conflict with the normal interpretation/use of `Keywords:', let > it be used for both. I disagree. Redundancy leads to misuse and under-use. And it's a pain to parse. Using `Keywords:' for tagging sections is good because most files need not be touched: they're already fine. On the other hand, if we introduce something like: ;; Section: python with a tight list of exclusive sections (a file can belong to only one section), I'd be fine with that. The key here that it needs to be small, with little room for misinterpretation. As I mentioned before, there are more than 1000 unique keywords for 2000 packages. Having so many unique keywords hampers their functionality. But then again, being too restrictive with `Section:' would probably lead to 800 packages filed under "convenience". That's why I think that `Keywords:' are still better. We just need to select a group of keywords that are deemed "important" and make it easy to see all "important" keywords at once and browse them. > Should be a no-brainer. `Keywords:' ain't broke; don't "fix" it. > Feel free to add new features that do something different and > have a different motivation. But don't bother `Keywords:' just > to implement what you need. It's not hard for you to leave > `Keywords:' alone, for its original, more flexible, use cases. I don't see how defining a subset of "important" ~50 keywords among the current ~1000 keywords in use is doing anything against the "more flexible" use cases. Basically, I want something like `finder-list-keywords' to work for all packages managed by package.el as well. I think it would be a great interface to complement `package-list-packages'. Maybe call it `package-list-categories'. It currently has 36 sections and looks great. I wouldn't mind changing my ace-window.el from: ;; Keywords: window, location to ;; Keywords: frames, window, location or even just ;; Keywords: frames to conform to `finder-list-keywords' convention.