From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Drew Adams Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: Adding a few more finder keywords Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2015 10:19:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <87sia2l04r.fsf@gmail.com> <873821xzon.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <048d389e-cd09-468e-b93f-729505e56ab0@default> <87zj49kkff.fsf@gmail.com> <6cb2edd7-dfca-41ab-b3cb-e09e29b39a94@default> <874mmgygjs.fsf@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1433870421 21274 80.91.229.3 (9 Jun 2015 17:20:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2015 17:20:21 +0000 (UTC) Cc: "Stephen J. Turnbull" , Stefan Monnier , Artur Malabarba , emacs-devel To: Oleh Krehel Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jun 09 19:20:09 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Z2NBz-0005r8-PU for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 09 Jun 2015 19:20:03 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36360 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z2NBz-0008Mm-4N for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 09 Jun 2015 13:20:03 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42591) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z2NBk-0008MO-Vy for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Jun 2015 13:19:49 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z2NBe-0001kL-T6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Jun 2015 13:19:48 -0400 Original-Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:35715) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z2NBe-0001k5-MY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Jun 2015 13:19:42 -0400 Original-Received: from userv0021.oracle.com (userv0021.oracle.com [156.151.31.71]) by userp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id t59HJcfV032679 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 9 Jun 2015 17:19:39 GMT Original-Received: from userv0121.oracle.com (userv0121.oracle.com [156.151.31.72]) by userv0021.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t59HJbLq024034 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 9 Jun 2015 17:19:37 GMT Original-Received: from abhmp0016.oracle.com (abhmp0016.oracle.com [141.146.116.22]) by userv0121.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t59HJb5V002731; Tue, 9 Jun 2015 17:19:37 GMT In-Reply-To: <874mmgygjs.fsf@gmail.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9 (901082) [OL 12.0.6691.5000 (x86)] X-Source-IP: userv0021.oracle.com [156.151.31.71] X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4.x-2.6.x [generic] X-Received-From: 156.151.31.81 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:187136 Archived-At: > > If you need something new, then add something new. Don't > > compromise existing constructs that others have been happily > > using in ways you don't approve of or cannot make use of. > > Share the road. >=20 > It seems that a misunderstanding lead you to believe that someone is > enforcing something. I ensure you that this isn't so. There will > never be a warning unless the package author specifically runs an > interactive command because he wants to check if his package will > generate a warning. Whether it's a package author or another user, s?he should not be asking for a test of whether `Keywords:' contains unrecognized keywords. S?he should be asking whether some other, new, package.el-specific field contains unrecognized keywords. That's the point. There is no sense in a package author or anyone else looking to see whether `Keywords:' is "proper". Doing what you suggest will only encourage package authors to restrict `Keywords:' to "proper" keywords. That is misguided, is what I am arguing. On the other hand, it is entirely useful for package authors to check for unrecognized package keywords. That checking should not be done against `Keywords:'. That's all. The feature you want to provide is something I've already said I am in favor of. The need for package authors to check for unrecognized package keywords is a real need. And a warning when a package author checks for that is entirely appropriate. Your new feature will be a welcome addition. What you do not seem to get is that it is not `Keywords:' that you and package authors should be using for this. That's all. > Inventing a new section is an option, but it's a cumbersome Tough tiddlywinks. Others got there before you. That part of the prairie has already been settled. If you want to live there too, then live by the same wild-west rules as the longtime inhabitants. No one has asked for a new sheriff with new rules. You might find this locale dirty, messy, chaotic, and confusing. But that's what the settlers of `Keywords:' had in mind, and that's they way they've developed it. Think Rio de Janeiro, not Brasilia. This is not virgin territory. > and unnecessary path. It's not unnecessary. It's necessary, if you (as I do) want to preserve `Keywords:' for what it's been all along: a place for arbitrary keywords, invented by anyone, for any purpose whatsoever. > I can have what I want with just `Keywords:' without imposing > anything on anyone, In my book, discouraging and warning people about "improper" keywords in `Keywords:' is imposing. That kind of policing (or kindly "suggesting") does not belong in `Keywords:'. Please take it elsewhere. That's all I'm asking. > possibly offering a guideline through a separate checkdoc utility > that so far comes disabled by default. All well and good. Just please take it elsewhere from `Keywords:'.