From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: FW: [External] : Re: Propose to add setup-wizard.el to ELPA Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2022 06:28:11 +0100 Message-ID: References: <834k6mdu7q.fsf@gnu.org> <87v8z12ud8.fsf@athena.silentflame.com> <874k6jci7j.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="HiXq33/122n2bcS8" Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="12148"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Jan 05 06:29:36 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1n4yrf-0002yD-9b for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 05 Jan 2022 06:29:35 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:37862 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n4yrd-0005AO-6I for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 05 Jan 2022 00:29:33 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:54014) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n4yqO-0004T4-9h for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 05 Jan 2022 00:28:16 -0500 Original-Received: from mail.tuxteam.de ([5.199.139.25]:36068) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n4yqM-0000BE-4e for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 05 Jan 2022 00:28:16 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tuxteam.de; s=mail; h=From:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID: Subject:To:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Cc:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=Q80VwJC/L8uXdbZ5mpqCnr0X5jWBHwlQggA++JnjKUQ=; b=WmCSZtkfpZcQ2WtfsGYYBkF3ex 04LvjBhNNu9ihh2cU/+Ey4Ln8fVTSoviCtCnJwvsuEL8Pp9bEYaS6fnl2KhLDaOk5uOR2rsIgR1lo SCi0h5wfZHcU1gEEARuMWa1FdXAbw+4gWIF/Xc4pJOXRMjNJ0YQyUfVkVbZmhayXHg97wz0d6esG6 ITfldUjZCSw6VpUWKdp2pJ6UvQ133SzwjACjHufNal47UgR+zjJnqxLmEc7xh88lCNV8JlAmo3m4T oi30Hoyt4Ki00ITB9eS2yyJJDK4vhZT7hgtpOLd5fdrx8fJXmrieQBiz1ASYps3qsRwzzji+3t/Zb ANZAB27A==; Original-Received: from tomas by mail.tuxteam.de with local (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1n4yqJ-0006SA-7J for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 05 Jan 2022 06:28:11 +0100 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Received-SPF: pass client-ip=5.199.139.25; envelope-from=tomas@tuxteam.de; helo=mail.tuxteam.de X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:284211 Archived-At: --HiXq33/122n2bcS8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Jan 04, 2022 at 09:28:26PM +0000, Drew Adams wrote: > @@>>>> Customize should not write to your init file ... > @@>>>> That's a bad Emacs design choice, IMO. > @@>>>> It especially should not be the default behavior. > > >>> > > >>> +1, FWIW. > > >> Hmm, then where should it write to? > > > IMO, something like > > > (setq custom-file (locate-user-emacs-file "custom-file.el")) > >=20 > > Hmm. I recently deleted something like that which had been in my init > > for years, because I looked it and couldn't come up with a reason why > > the code should be in a separate file. It seemed like pointless > > complexity. Why do you think it's better that way? >=20 > Go to @@. Where's @@? (genuine question: I don't know what you want to convey with that expression :) > Mixing hand coding and automatic coding in the same > file is error-prone. It's just asking for trouble. > And it's not needed. And this is the point where your (respected, mind you) opinion enters the scene. We're taking that risk all the time whenever several people work on the same code. You might argue they understand the code they're changing, but then, we are doing it mechanically too, whenever we do a VC merge, and this relies generally on simple textual distance to "declare" that two changes are independent. Courage :) Having a comment marker ;; here be lions =2E.. ;; end of lions =2E.. as customize has been doing --uh-- customarily should suffice perfectly (for some users, some contexts). As for what should be the recommended way, I still agree with you 100%. I still don't agree that there should be extra code to enforce that. What would make me happy is to supply a minimal init.el file already containing the "include" and a minimal (empty) custom.el for new installations. Cheers --=20 t >=20 --HiXq33/122n2bcS8 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iF0EABECAB0WIQRp53liolZD6iXhAoIFyCz1etHaRgUCYdUsZQAKCRAFyCz1etHa RtjAAJ4vwKM93id19k+2gU0vWIutbjeWjwCeKW2ycs/474z1YIKdBClF87sUMM0= =UkZg -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --HiXq33/122n2bcS8--