unofficial mirror of emacs-devel@gnu.org 
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>
To: rms@gnu.org, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org
Subject: RE: Use of minibuffer-prompt face when minibuffer is not involved
Date: Sun, 12 May 2019 16:32:20 -0700 (PDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <c3a4b2a3-cffe-4463-8cc9-38c4b495ef0b@default> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E1hPx0H-0006i4-Vd@fencepost.gnu.org>

>   > > Active minibuffer is in _no_ way "an internal detail".
> 
>   > You have 2 core Emacs developers disagree with you, which 
>   > is a clear sign that you are wrong.
> 
> That question is a matter of judgment, not objective fact.

It's an objective fact that the minibuffer being used for
input is observably different behavior from reading input
in other ways (e.g. `read-char').

If users can perceive different behavior then the
difference is not just an internal detail.  I don't think
that's a matter of judgment or opinion.

There may be implementation matters to consider, but that
doesn't change the fact that the behaviors are different
for _users_.

And anyway, no particular implementation matters were
presented for discussion.  There was only an invitation
to "see the code" (which?).
 
> If this were a question of objective fact, the maintainers could
> conceivably be objectively wrong, and someoe else objectively right.
> Such things are unusual, but they do happen.

What is "this"?  The question posed was whether
non-minbuffer prompts should have a face, and if so,
which face.  Everyone has so far agreed on that.

And yes, _that's_ a question of opinion/judgment.
Normally when such questions are raised here reasons
are given to support opinions, and ultimately the
maintainers decide/judge.

> But there is no objectively right in a question like this.  The
> maintainers have to go by _their_ best judgment.  Others who disagree
> can try to show good reasons for judging things differently; but if
> the managers have understood those reasons and are not convinced by
> them, that's the end of it.

Of course.  IF there has been a maintainer decision
that's one thing - that's the end of it.  So far, I
haven't understood that.

I've seen only expressions of opinion or preference.
I thought the question was open for discussion, which
to me invites reason, not just like/dislike votes.

One user opened the question for discussion; I replied
with one point of view and supporting arguments; then
two maintainers replied with like/dislike opinions
without reasons (AFAICT): "That's what I vote for."

If that's really the extent of the discussion, so be it.



  reply	other threads:[~2019-05-12 23:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-05-10 18:35 Use of minibuffer-prompt face when minibuffer is not involved Kévin Le Gouguec
2019-05-10 20:52 ` Stefan Monnier
2019-05-10 21:59   ` Drew Adams
2019-05-10 22:36     ` Stefan Monnier
2019-05-11  6:25       ` Eli Zaretskii
2019-05-11 13:22     ` Kévin Le Gouguec
     [not found]     ` <<jwvftpm9buh.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org>
     [not found]       ` <<83o949ecdc.fsf@gnu.org>
2019-05-11 13:52         ` Drew Adams
2019-05-11 14:11           ` Eli Zaretskii
2019-05-12 22:31             ` Richard Stallman
2019-05-12 23:32               ` Drew Adams [this message]
     [not found]     ` <<<jwvftpm9buh.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org>
     [not found]       ` <<<83o949ecdc.fsf@gnu.org>
     [not found]         ` <<c7e501bb-9dd8-4b00-8647-d0731f2b2565@default>
     [not found]           ` <<83o949cc88.fsf@gnu.org>
2019-05-11 14:34             ` Drew Adams
2019-05-11 13:50   ` Solving bug#35564 (was: Use of minibuffer-prompt face when minibuffer is not involved) Kévin Le Gouguec
2019-05-11 14:13     ` Solving bug#35564 Stefan Monnier
     [not found] <<<8736lmi2dg.fsf@gmail.com>
     [not found] <<8736lmi2dg.fsf@gmail.com>

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=c3a4b2a3-cffe-4463-8cc9-38c4b495ef0b@default \
    --to=drew.adams@oracle.com \
    --cc=eliz@gnu.org \
    --cc=emacs-devel@gnu.org \
    --cc=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca \
    --cc=rms@gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox

	https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).