From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Juanma Barranquero Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Deprecate _emacs on Windows Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 01:26:03 +0100 Message-ID: References: <0B6A6EC5FD8F46D697F914FB2F6D4304@us.oracle.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1300841192 21577 80.91.229.12 (23 Mar 2011 00:46:32 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 00:46:32 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Lennart Borgman , Stefan Monnier , Emacs developers To: Drew Adams Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 23 01:46:28 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 1Q2CDN-0005ye-Ke for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 23 Mar 2011 01:46:24 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44284 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Q2Bzr-0000e4-Nw for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 22 Mar 2011 20:32:23 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=36088 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Q2BuP-0002Vj-1z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Mar 2011 20:26:46 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q2BuN-0005wJ-WF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Mar 2011 20:26:44 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-yx0-f169.google.com ([209.85.213.169]:47748) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q2BuN-0005w5-Td for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Mar 2011 20:26:43 -0400 Original-Received: by yxt33 with SMTP id 33so3989861yxt.0 for ; Tue, 22 Mar 2011 17:26:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=EtkDmRn95FcuhJA9m5fv6f7osoIDc3dDyeyCZNmeYW8=; b=xqKO6TFf3e8JasibikiJLBN5gibOpjT4Wc+eL8EC8u/2x7RkHfWyGW8xhlLBjJbUt1 GLW2Itbf8mFfOeiQqiVk7dDIPmTqX0x6ATHibecpcR+9ohyXaNJyiojvycOO2Bbuh4br +5e8l+7HDXAsmBsIaOgblCZVIdsUd9iuIxjlk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=rqMe6GQYE9+xsdpLZfuABMC1lH9Gkb9HFDC3inPrM/7TZDYrOupDp7ssWCEf3dZXHO PTc6iUBbf6qPMaUnmMc5j1XnyneeLfxNp/uCqw4NzAV8TZoLmIUxXe5EKZT0jJnT6lhN L+gh5VieqZXW8Fj2KK2tHp81BPZtsylzib+xU= Original-Received: by 10.146.102.34 with SMTP id z34mr5627142yab.34.1300840003128; Tue, 22 Mar 2011 17:26:43 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.147.34.11 with HTTP; Tue, 22 Mar 2011 17:26:03 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <0B6A6EC5FD8F46D697F914FB2F6D4304@us.oracle.com> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Received-From: 209.85.213.169 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:137546 Archived-At: > Why should it still exist? Why not? You're making a big, big deal of a small warning that just tells the user to rename a file. And, why are you not pissed off by "emacs --unibyte", for example? > Why should they have to? Why should they not? By your reasoning, we should deprecate things, but *never* remove them, because, why should we force users to change anything? Well, if they are really that interested in keeping _emacs, they can stay with Emacs 23. > Why issue a _warning_ for this? =C2=A0As long as a user's `_emacs' is fou= nd and used > (traditional behavior) there is nothing to warn about. We're warning them that in a not-so-distant future they will find their _emacs no longer working. > And if a user's `_emacs' > is no longer sought and found (i.e. ignored, in the future) then the warn= ing > obviously does no good. I fail to understand your reasoning here, sorry. > Since when does the mere act of deprecation call for a _warning_? =C2=A0A= warning is > in order only if a particular deprecation means there is some danger to w= arn > about. You have already lectured us on your interpretation for the word "warning". I still disagree. > Yes, I know you did, which is why I added that this has moved well beyond > Amerika. =C2=A0As I said, a couple of generations and globalization have = spread it, > yes, even as far as Catalunya and the Canary Islands. =C2=A0You might lik= e to believe > you are not so influenced by American culture, but think again. Please! Are you really unable to talk about these matters without being patronizing? =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Juanma