From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Kangas Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: master 432c1aa: Use `pop-to-buffer-same-window' in `project-eshell' Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2021 12:31:56 -0500 Message-ID: References: <20210308115905.6593.76443@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <20210308115907.30AD520A10@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="24005"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" To: Dmitry Gutov , =?UTF-8?Q?Simen_Heggest=C3=B8yl?= , emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Mar 20 18:34:02 2021 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 1lNfUA-00068Z-Ag for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 20 Mar 2021 18:34:02 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:54782 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lNfU9-0005yA-BO for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 20 Mar 2021 13:34:01 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:36344) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lNfSD-0004UI-2f for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 20 Mar 2021 13:32:01 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-pj1-f42.google.com ([209.85.216.42]:50782) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lNfSB-0000oB-G2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 20 Mar 2021 13:32:00 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-pj1-f42.google.com with SMTP id gb6so6238083pjb.0 for ; Sat, 20 Mar 2021 10:31:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=TlcRElxMNUjIn0NtG/BmPyI0uKx1dI8nViM7blScvRE=; b=Z6VwoJWh4nrXx9ZE6ox93fFK1dLuenRchk8u/wPlAtlQm9gG7EvjBd2XaPIwI9PklT 3o2lZvyLFGJYSXBErrEb9Gxgxe1g3u5YADKRUkNA9s8t5Z6U3XzYLsfVtBu/tYHtbeNu g/tCv3a+DqO0VcOVi/M/79AKnQUDGinhBQA8JgNp8KIRx6aw3fYjBkgx2wwoJ9QsKD7t 2AxJ2yarlgrkBEuWMlJFUcxexTlc1lHtLOlFgeVG6lOPbR2LMoOVVmM0+KeCnTDH/S8J 7XLcTHhbQ03Z56ySk61xigOqK9LCp1fvRU5AkCAiIi8Pdwq1qoJoLj/DS0yFIvGbF2vN EpTQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531elUj18cONPUYOv29F/IhzYMPYsD6XXSHXVNc3vbC2AFIQ6uJJ hd3abGMk/NXpZBv3qQ09JABVMTPLv3tHAyC4R6s= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzP5mL0IcXDvXgKmimpzCm2p6jnaLwQNZ2ywbTrDgy1rKKucT6oTb33k2YQsIcWOHfq3oQ3oflBCopSbTxeyqA= X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:f986:: with SMTP id cq6mr4534775pjb.175.1616261517136; Sat, 20 Mar 2021 10:31:57 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from 753933720722 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Sat, 20 Mar 2021 12:31:56 -0500 In-Reply-To: Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.216.42; envelope-from=stefankangas@gmail.com; helo=mail-pj1-f42.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -13 X-Spam_score: -1.4 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.249, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, 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: 2.1.23 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:266659 Archived-At: Dmitry Gutov writes: > Perhaps the answer is to first decide which behavior makes most sense, > then make M-x eshell and M-x shell both adopt it, and then do it for > project-* versions as well (which would be the easy part)? Yes, that's a good approach. > I'm guessing the average user is more likely to more often use, say, > eshell and project-eshell, rather than alternate between shell and > eshell evenly. Sounds like a reasonable first guess. I have no idea if my use is typical, but I use eshell when I can and shell when I have to. That is, I prefer eshell but sometimes run into problems with this or that and cowardly revert to shell instead of trying to fix it. For example, I'm currently too lazy to figure out how to use a Python virtualenv/venv with eshell so I'm back to using shell for a bit.