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: [drew.adams@oracle.com: RE: file-cache doc should state thatthecache is non-persistent] Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 12:03:28 -0800 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1143576234 8579 80.91.229.2 (28 Mar 2006 20:03:54 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 20:03:54 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Mar 28 22:03:52 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FOKPv-0004MO-KS for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 28 Mar 2006 22:03:51 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FOKPv-0005wu-8J for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 28 Mar 2006 15:03:51 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FOKPi-0005uS-Pr for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 28 Mar 2006 15:03:38 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FOKPf-0005sb-WC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 28 Mar 2006 15:03:37 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FOKPf-0005sK-FW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 28 Mar 2006 15:03:35 -0500 Original-Received: from [148.87.113.118] (helo=rgminet01.oracle.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA:24) (Exim 4.52) id 1FOKRS-0006p7-6b for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 28 Mar 2006 15:05:26 -0500 Original-Received: from rgmsgw300.us.oracle.com (rgmsgw300.us.oracle.com [138.1.186.49]) by rgminet01.oracle.com (Switch-3.1.6/Switch-3.1.6) with ESMTP id k2SK3VKA009106 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2006 13:03:31 -0700 Original-Received: from dradamslap (dhcp-amer-csvpn-gw1-141-144-66-253.vpn.oracle.com [141.144.66.253]) by rgmsgw300.us.oracle.com (Switch-3.1.7/Switch-3.1.7) with SMTP id k2SK3UQp016906 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2006 13:03:31 -0700 Original-To: X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1506 X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= X-Whitelist: TRUE X-Whitelist: TRUE 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:52171 Archived-At: > Btw, should we merge the "File Name Cache" section with > the following one, "File Convenience"? They are both short, > and the file cache is certainly a convenience feature of the > kind described in the latter section. > > No, I don't think that's a very good idea. File Name Cache is > a reasonable, self-contained topic. File Convenience is, currently, > a grab-bag or catch-all. There's nothing wrong with a grab-bag section describing a feature that has several commands. I didn't say there was anything wrong with that (though that node could benefit from a bit more structure (e.g. bullets), as it is essentially a list). What I said was that File Name Cache is a self-contained topic. I see no reason to toss it into the grab bag, but the grab-bag list could (should) include a link to File Name Cache. Just one opinion.