From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: Deprecate _emacs on Windows Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 19:42:11 -0700 Message-ID: <9DFDF596429B48FA9473B7C303E53C66@us.oracle.com> References: <0B6A6EC5FD8F46D697F914FB2F6D4304@us.oracle.com> <655D5DBB48F04F719130122440CDA29B@us.oracle.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1300848158 19522 80.91.229.12 (23 Mar 2011 02:42:38 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 02:42:38 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 'Lennart Borgman' , 'Stefan Monnier' , 'Emacs developers' To: "'Juanma Barranquero'" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 23 03:42:32 2011 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 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q2E1o-0002Vj-93 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 23 Mar 2011 03:42:32 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35261 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Q2E1n-00033p-KK for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 22 Mar 2011 22:42:31 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=43351 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Q2E1f-00032k-3G for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Mar 2011 22:42:24 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q2E1c-0001bE-KA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Mar 2011 22:42:22 -0400 Original-Received: from rcsinet10.oracle.com ([148.87.113.121]:33487) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q2E1c-0001aw-Ak for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Mar 2011 22:42:20 -0400 Original-Received: from rcsinet15.oracle.com (rcsinet15.oracle.com [148.87.113.117]) by rcsinet10.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.2) with ESMTP id p2N2gGvA015165 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 23 Mar 2011 02:42:18 GMT Original-Received: from acsmt357.oracle.com (acsmt357.oracle.com [141.146.40.157]) by rcsinet15.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.1) with ESMTP id p2N2gGVv029431 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 23 Mar 2011 02:42:16 GMT Original-Received: from abhmt008.oracle.com (abhmt008.oracle.com [141.146.116.17]) by acsmt357.oracle.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id p2N2gFp9005141; Tue, 22 Mar 2011 21:42:15 -0500 Original-Received: from dradamslap1 (/10.159.58.141) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Tue, 22 Mar 2011 19:42:15 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: Thread-Index: Acvo+pBDUTY+v0RoTxCn5ekN7iBI0wAA0p7g X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5994 X-Source-IP: acsmt357.oracle.com [141.146.40.157] X-Auth-Type: Internal IP X-CT-RefId: str=0001.0A090203.4D895E08.00AA,ss=1,fgs=0 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 148.87.113.121 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:137551 Archived-At: > > Google "warning". =A0Enjoy. >=20 > Sorry, but I'm not convinced. Words mean what people use them to mean. Precisely. And words mostly mean what most people use them to mean most = of the time. Google "warning definition". English-language dictionaries base = definitions on _usage_ (more so than dictionaries in some other languages). And web dictionaries probably do so even more. So go ahead, see how people actually _use_ "warning"; I invite you. = Google "warning definition". But you will say I'm patronizing you by presuming = that Google might teach you something about this... > > ad hominem, ad hominem. =A0Sticks and stones... >=20 > My comment wasn't an argument ad hominem; Yes, that part of your post was ad hominem. But it was not an = _argument_ at all. It was nothing but name-calling. I am not patronizing you just = because I give arguments about a growing tendency to overuse of so-called = "warnings". I gave reasons why this has been happening. You can argue with my reasoning or evidence, but please don't stoop to name-calling. It's not about me. And my point is not about you. I = couldn't care less who is behind this change. You spoke up saying that my argument about American corporate avoidance = of lawsuits was invalid or irrelevant because you are in Spain. I argued = that this tendency has extended beyond the American shore. Counter the argument = if you want, but don't call me patronizing because you don't like the argument = or its implications. Now you can say that it doesn't really matter _why_ there is this = watering down of the effect and meaning of a word such as "WARNING". In general = that's true, but it can help to see that there is such a tendency. If you think (if one thinks) it's normal to be warning people about such = minor things then I'm guessing it could help to know that this watering down = is something relatively new. And more importantly (because who really = cares what how "warning" might be evolving?), when you overuse and misuse the word = this way it ceases to have the effect it is intended to have when you really need = it. > > It's not about you, Juanma - and it's not about me. =A0It's about = the > > pseudo-warning message, regardless of who is behind that initiative. >=20 > Oh, yes, it is a bit about you, as you're the one royaly pissed by the > warning... That I disagree with issuing the warning message doesn't make this about = me. Unless you take the view that whenever someone disagrees with you it's = about him. > on behalf of some semi-mythical users that you somehow > stand to protect. You know, that great contingent of / Emacs 24+ / > Windows / users / having an _emacs init file /. I don't speak for other users, nor do I claim to. But I do want Emacs = to be the best it can be for users in general. I speak up when the doc or the UI = is not as good as it could be. I point to specific problems, as I see them. = That does not mean I'm pretending to speak on behalf of all Emacs users. I speak = for myself, caring about Emacs's interface with users. And it doesn't really matter to my point whether there are lots or few = users impacted by this particular message. My message is about the message; = more precisely, it is about this kind of pseudo-warning message. > > The message is not warning about anything. =A0It's simply=20 > > telling a user that `_emacs' is deprecated. =A0That's not a warning. > >=A0There is no danger. >=20 > Of course there is a danger. The danger of the user upgrading to a new > Emacs and failing to understand why their _emacs suddenly stopped > working[1]. Danger of failing to understand. Hm. By that logic anything we = communicate to users, to help them understand anything at all, should take the form of = a warning message. After all, there's always the "danger" that they misunderstand. The question is, what is the _danger in misunderstanding_ this = deprecation or being ignorant of it? Do you catch pneumonia? Does your data melt = down? Just what is the danger? Please stop playing with words ("danger of failing = to understand", indeed), and come out with it: just what danger are we = warning users about here? > In fact, if we don't warn about it, some users will be > caught unawares. And then what? The _danger_ is? And please don't repeat that the = "danger" is that they will be caught unaware. > > We don't need to tell users this at Emacs startup - it's=20 > > not a big deal that `_emacs' is being deprecated. =A0Users are > > often frightened by "**WARNING**" - and that's part of its effect. > >=A0But there is no call for frightening users here. >=20 > They shouldn't be frightened. Some will be. That's the effect that "WARNING" and "DANGER!" have, at = least on some people. That's part of their impact. > They should be warned. About what? So far, you've indicated only that they should be helpfully _informed_ = about this deprecation. I have explicitly agreed that they should. The place = to do that is in the NEWS file, and possibly also in the manual.