From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel,gmane.emacs.pretest.bugs Subject: Re: 23.0.60; M-( and M-) should not be bound in ESC map Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2008 21:58:17 -0400 Message-ID: References: <003801c89a85$fcd95ad0$c2b22382@us.oracle.com> <008d01c89b26$8aacebb0$c2b22382@us.oracle.com> <000101c89cae$db3b5380$0200a8c0@us.oracle.com> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1208051910 12811 80.91.229.12 (13 Apr 2008 01:58:30 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2008 01:58:30 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org To: "Drew Adams" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Apr 13 03:59:04 2008 connect(): Connection refused Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JkrUl-0008GI-HJ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 13 Apr 2008 03:59:03 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JkrU7-00079L-NT for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 12 Apr 2008 21:58:23 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JkrU3-00078j-L8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Apr 2008 21:58:19 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JkrU2-00078H-6X for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Apr 2008 21:58:19 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JkrU2-00078E-19 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Apr 2008 21:58:18 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JkrU1-0004cj-MM for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Apr 2008 21:58:17 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1JkrU1-0000td-5e; Sat, 12 Apr 2008 21:58:17 -0400 In-reply-to: <000101c89cae$db3b5380$0200a8c0@us.oracle.com> (drew.adams@oracle.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:95094 gmane.emacs.pretest.bugs:22014 Archived-At: > That is true, but it is also true that if we keep reopening questions > decided long ago, we will make our lives very difficult and probably > make little progress. We have to leave well enough alone for the old > features most of the time, in order to have time to add the > new features we know we want. I did not keep reopening this. I didn't say that you did. I simply submitted a bug report. Your bug report reopened a question about Emacs's interface that we decided many years ago. That one message, reopening one question, would not be a problem. But people have tried to reopen many different questions that were decided long ago, and that adds up to a big time drain.