From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: position on changing defaults? Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2008 21:18:56 -0500 Message-ID: References: <200803050637.m256bXL3008361@sallyv1.ics.uci.edu> <87hcfkdhqk.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87d4q8sq9c.fsf@jurta.org> <8763w0n393.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <871w6ounk0.fsf@kfs-lx.rd.rdm> <87ablacdxt.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <47D1E096.7040809@gmail.com> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1205029248 11131 80.91.229.12 (9 Mar 2008 02:20:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2008 02:20:48 +0000 (UTC) Cc: juri@jurta.org, cyd@stupidchicken.com, storm@cua.dk, emacs-devel@gnu.org, miles@gnu.org To: "Lennart Borgman (gmail)" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Mar 09 03:21:15 2008 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 4.50) id 1JYBA2-0005nS-Ou for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 09 Mar 2008 03:21:15 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JYB9U-0001Rg-Ih for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 08 Mar 2008 21:20:40 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JYB7u-0008JW-CN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Mar 2008 21:19:02 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JYB7p-0008HO-LM for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Mar 2008 21:19:01 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JYB7p-0008HI-BO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Mar 2008 21:18:57 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JYB7p-0006Jl-2a for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Mar 2008 21:18:57 -0500 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1JYB7o-0002EJ-Mt; Sat, 08 Mar 2008 21:18:56 -0500 In-reply-to: <47D1E096.7040809@gmail.com> (lennart.borgman@gmail.com) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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:91838 Archived-At: Maybe a much more radical surgery would be easier. How about having the convention that whenever a movement is bound to a shifted key then this should activate the region? If the movement is bound to a non-shifted key then it should deactivate the region. It is better to have the keymaps control what keys do. Let's not hard-wire any keys or modifiers if we can avoid it.