From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Thibaut Verron Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: How are the defaults chosen? Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2020 11:30:55 +0200 Message-ID: References: <83d02vkox1.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: thibaut.verron@gmail.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000004fefd505aef23a50" Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="30813"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Sep 10 11:32:35 2020 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 1kGIwT-0007tD-CD for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 11:32:33 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56454 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kGIwS-00067d-CE for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 05:32:32 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:60234) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kGIvA-0004rh-K5 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 05:31:16 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-wm1-x32f.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::32f]:33213) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kGIv8-0002HC-Oc; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 05:31:12 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-wm1-x32f.google.com with SMTP id e11so1469053wme.0; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 02:31:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:reply-to:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=GHYYw1tzhTDNQOhnQdvAbEIY6ZQ+dkodGVOhbMR2g2o=; b=CR/xdZRbHSNDUH/YkoCnwS3IbKqiEYDbHfcp9HcVMG54Bh43YNWvjI8xoCuvH84i5o bgwu5sVTpB2H3e750aKEzwdQNwyb38Z2xStm+aO1iCYft9OkVI5ZyWY0gZ11JWDpva/J 7Lu3MIkkErU5/ZKcIB6fA3xHN7yZZaAGKM9lJOx+xwWc3/O4URBXdSWjlHGE8EhIJLXN yJqEP2eaEVhpIOpqL8jlot2Gg839xu3XMQZ8MGLZnDsa8gdQLIv4NNf4GCsVUCJSjP44 w4mYeasvdTqWXvBP/yKt4imurhX08/yGgv2VbH3uBi10e2vWcYgYaxFJ+gdqgand8v/y +ccA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:reply-to :from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=GHYYw1tzhTDNQOhnQdvAbEIY6ZQ+dkodGVOhbMR2g2o=; b=O+nSm/T+1MgRWHMaZ8in7cA23W4qvMAou6q9IilMbdV2n9EC/28MFaPRA7Y1QxMFrl SKY0LPGIOYaX0GheYCk3PPbu04D8IZbXl3bKQdkegF2+Lp7Kw2InOkzesH5VMDJfyla8 ohAKiH436vta97etxBq9hGMUCRAZpL7Nevr+OMRHBBae9XunYgA50aam9PXO3ekgQute GC5F+ROldFH6wcihrJs5J6hld1nmF79n8XUlOtPhwMe9KSoaiv7ImJCubzYPtc7yA7S9 qcxY19iVI2QdnmvMEzsBYwAUezW982hRrdfunTl0mZmXUFydiGe2BasQkHjG7I4xWzfz pMNA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5301BZ0afmfqBnyoE/c+sT0LWvxPtpzOnYljrUCRQ3vlFBu4EuQE s7S6QOuUrxPKBSE0Naej1PLNkrjDVbojA231s0/c3Za15tNXjw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz73vBWp5nx1Tps/FUnAGYuOYAJK50fgtc4HFHcbG64Cc+vn0P64BjLf8k9gRFk1N1swUkabfKaZsxiuMao3vQ= X-Received: by 2002:a1c:a746:: with SMTP id q67mr8068748wme.128.1599730267188; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 02:31:07 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <83d02vkox1.fsf@gnu.org> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::32f; envelope-from=thibaut.verron@gmail.com; helo=mail-wm1-x32f.google.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: No matching host in p0f cache. That's all we know. X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham 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:254957 Archived-At: --0000000000004fefd505aef23a50 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > How probable is the success of such a discussion, do you think? We > cannot even agree on specific options, and here you suggest to take > this disagreement to a much higher and abstract level. > That's a good point. If "success" means "agreement on a single guideline", I think it is 0. But I'd say that "agreement that everybody wants A, B or C as main guidelines" (and may still disagree on how to achieve them) would still be progress. I think that the "higher level discussion" could also be less emotional and less multi-directional, by not looking at specific options. I was surprised to see in the other discussion some messages arguing that ibuffer is too confusing compared to list-buffers, and others arguing that undo/redo is inferior to the undo-ring model to the point of being unusable. If anything, thinking about such guidelines should give indications as to what the "themes" should be. I imagine that everybody has an internal model of what a barebones emacs should be (e.g. actually barebones, or simplified settings, or superior paradigms in full...), and while there are certainly thousands of combinations of options to realize those models, there can't be that many models. In that sense, agreeing on a subset of goals might be an easier task than agreeing on a set of options. But that might indeed be wishful thinking, and I didn't realize at the time of posting that it makes the discussion essentially a duplicate of the one on themes. Sorry about that. Thibaut --0000000000004fefd505aef23a50 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
How probable is the success of such a discussion, do you= think?=C2=A0 We
cannot even agree on specific options, and here you suggest to take
this disagreement to a much higher and abstract level.

That's a good point. If "success" means "= ;agreement on a single guideline", I think it is 0.
But I= 9;d say that "agreement that everybody wants A, B or C as main guideli= nes" (and may
still disagree on how to achieve them) would s= till be progress.

I think that the "higher le= vel discussion" could also be less emotional and less multi-directiona= l,=C2=A0
by not looking at specific options. I was surprised = to see in the other discussion some messages=C2=A0
arguing that i= buffer is too confusing compared to list-buffers, and others arguing that u= ndo/redo=C2=A0
is inferior to the undo-ring model to the point of= being unusable.

If anything, thinking about such = guidelines should give indications as to what the "themes"=C2=A0<= /div>
should be. I imagine that everybody has an internal model of what= a barebones emacs should=C2=A0
be (e.g. actually barebones, or s= implified settings, or superior paradigms in full...), and while=C2=A0
there are certainly thousands of combinations of options to realize t= hose models, there can't be=C2=A0
that many models.=C2=A0

In that sense, agreeing on a subset of goals might be= an easier task than agreeing on a set=C2=A0
of options.=C2=A0

But that might indeed be wishful thinking, and I did= n't realize at the time of posting that it makes=C2=A0
the di= scussion essentially a duplicate of the one on themes. Sorry about that.

Thibaut


--0000000000004fefd505aef23a50--