From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Idea for determining what users use Date: Sat, 07 Jun 2003 06:22:04 -0400 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <59EC6788-92AE-11D7-8588-00039363E640@swipnet.se> <200306010124.h511OFZ22272@eel.dms.auburn.edu> <200306010159.h511xiE22326@eel.dms.auburn.edu> <5xof1ebwjr.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> <5x4r346ont.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1054981420 27920 80.91.224.249 (7 Jun 2003 10:23:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2003 10:23:40 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Sat Jun 07 12:23:37 2003 Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 19OarJ-0007G5-00 for ; Sat, 07 Jun 2003 12:23:37 +0200 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 19ObAJ-0000vD-00 for ; Sat, 07 Jun 2003 12:43:15 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19OasR-0001TE-JI for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Sat, 07 Jun 2003 06:24:47 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.20) id 19OarA-0000Y0-Le for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 07 Jun 2003 06:23:28 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.20) id 19Oar2-0000PF-CU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 07 Jun 2003 06:23:20 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19Oapo-0008QQ-SJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 07 Jun 2003 06:22:04 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.20) id 19Oapo-0005ff-6G; Sat, 07 Jun 2003 06:22:04 -0400 Original-To: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) In-reply-to: <5x4r346ont.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> (storm@cua.dk) Original-cc: jan.h.d@swipnet.se Original-cc: monnier+misc/ads@rum.cs.yale.edu Original-cc: monnier+gnu/emacs@rum.cs.yale.edu Original-cc: teirllm@dms.auburn.edu Original-cc: alex@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1b5 Precedence: list List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:14867 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:14867 IMO, it would be much simpler just to move the feature to obsolete in 21.5, and if we don't get any feedback on the feature, we may decide to remove it in 22.1 -- or just leave it in. We are talking about different scenarios. Lisp files can be moved to the obsolete directory. Some features are not files, or even specific parts of files; they cannot easily be moved anywhere. So in emacs 21.5, we mark feature X so that usage is reported back to the emacs team. In the 2-3 years before we release emacs 22.1, we have gathered enough "no responses" to decide feature X may be removed in 22.1. It won't take 2-3 years after 21.5 is released to find out whether there is substantial usage of a feature.