From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lennart Borgman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: d-s-m default: Nil + explanation! Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 14:03:07 +0100 Message-ID: References: <87sk7pzqsp.fsf@ambire.localdomain> <8739zps45s.fsf@mean.albasani.net> <87mxxw6c7b.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1269522234 19042 80.91.229.12 (25 Mar 2010 13:03:54 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 13:03:54 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: David Kastrup Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Mar 25 14:03:50 2010 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 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Numiu-0007F5-Iv for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 25 Mar 2010 14:03:45 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59522 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Numit-00035B-Ex for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 25 Mar 2010 09:03:43 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Numio-00034o-Kv for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 25 Mar 2010 09:03:38 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=40177 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Numik-00033L-Cf for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 25 Mar 2010 09:03:38 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Numie-00013s-Uf for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 25 Mar 2010 09:03:34 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-fx0-f225.google.com ([209.85.220.225]:48839) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Numie-00013m-Ow; Thu, 25 Mar 2010 09:03:28 -0400 Original-Received: by fxm25 with SMTP id 25so4764fxm.26 for ; Thu, 25 Mar 2010 06:03:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=1SH0deYMRdvbIqvTjsZZ8kNHTSqMPi0pLCz/UPFaU8s=; b=YI81H790wYO5SNvDwTB6bR/t5Rw7G43MinAHygyphcNTzr1jmGNXL+nuiUELxP7Hbq DZ82r7OkBfFR82eqi9Jc+Qkqg7WpWeGuet8wTW5dCdljqqsZykCIdNhIcPUFoSXx+Egh Z/00wM3Ll0d7sDHhoJ+tBsyRh4oHd5UpVK8Ys= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; b=vGrvny/QbUkKZ6BL79r4BM0P4dXcgzCuypJgTn7ZVSEMYKe/wluN+Dt+EExVb5MNWT yAUrbfzFYD8o6o9qKrarXIK87+/lXWNR2G7OovlqIDCvxICb3smNG5sC7yCUWsYKFpun m9yyXHjLnUquEnLa2lnWGT5Hxz/pKvZvz3xNc= Original-Received: by 10.239.167.203 with SMTP id h11mr1025838hbe.53.1269522207159; Thu, 25 Mar 2010 06:03:27 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87mxxw6c7b.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) 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:122648 Archived-At: On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 9:24 AM, David Kastrup wrote: > Lennart Borgman writes: > >> On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 1:24 AM, Memnon Anon >> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I wanted to give a small explanation, why I think Nil is the better >>> default. >> >> Thanks for giving your opinion. >> >> >>> I think changing to D-S-M as a default is throwing dust into the eyes of >>> the new users: Emacs is different. And without a minimal willingness to >>> read the documentation, one will certainly fail. >> >> I see no reason that they should have to read something before they >> can do even the simplest editing. > > There is no point in reverting to polemics until we have even decided > what we are talking about. I do not think what I said is just polemics. I tried to describe how users can be expected to behave today. This is an important point. I do not have time to dig into research of this question now, but if you know some it would be great (and I would be very surprised if I was wrong in this particular case). > Any attempts of mine to narrow down the issue to separately decidable > (and configurable) issues have been ignored: one or two postings later > we are back to polemics. I have pointed to that it looks lik better integration with cua-mode is needed, but I have got no reply to that.