Please rename trusted-content to trusted-contents

Please rename trusted-content to trusted-contents

[Richard Stallman]

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

"Contents" and "content" are two different words, and for this
meaning, "contents" is correct.  It means the contents of the
file, and that's what we refer to here.

Please let's rename that symbol now before it gets into a release.
-- 
Dr Richard Stallman (https://stallman.org)
Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project (https://gnu.org)
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)

Re: Please rename trusted-content to trusted-contents

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
> Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2024 00:23:32 -0500
> 
> "Contents" and "content" are two different words, and for this
> meaning, "contents" is correct.  It means the contents of the
> file, and that's what we refer to here.
> 
> Please let's rename that symbol now before it gets into a release.

The Emacs 30.0.93 pretest was already uploaded with "trusted-content"
in it.  So if we rename it now, we will need to support both
spellings, via defvaralias.  I'm not sure the problem is acute enough
to justify such last-minute changes.

Re: Please rename trusted-content to trusted-contents

[Stefan Kangas]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
>> Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2024 00:23:32 -0500
>>
>> "Contents" and "content" are two different words, and for this
>> meaning, "contents" is correct.  It means the contents of the
>> file, and that's what we refer to here.
>>
>> Please let's rename that symbol now before it gets into a release.
>
> The Emacs 30.0.93 pretest was already uploaded with "trusted-content"
> in it.  So if we rename it now, we will need to support both
> spellings, via defvaralias.  I'm not sure the problem is acute enough
> to justify such last-minute changes.

Do we really maintain backwards-compatibility with all pretest releases
also?  I usually consider them more like development branches: used for
testing, not for production.

In any case, I think using the right word is better, so if we need a
defvaralias then so be it, IMO.  I don't see how it could hurt, and we
could even define-obsolete-variable-alias.