From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Remove set-mark-default-inactive? Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2012 18:29:35 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87hanx19bl.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1355009391 28380 80.91.229.3 (8 Dec 2012 23:29:51 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2012 23:29:51 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Chong Yidong Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Dec 09 00:30:04 2012 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 1ThTqH-0000v5-8O for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 09 Dec 2012 00:29:57 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:49705 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ThTq4-0001I3-Ly for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 08 Dec 2012 18:29:44 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:45310) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ThTq0-0001H4-Bl for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Dec 2012 18:29:42 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ThTpz-0007jR-6v for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Dec 2012 18:29:40 -0500 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.182]:25932) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ThTpw-0007iq-UT; Sat, 08 Dec 2012 18:29:36 -0500 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av0EAG6Zu09soXOY/2dsb2JhbABEtBGBCIIVAQEEAVYjBQsLDiYSFBgNJIgcBboJkEQDiEKacYFYgwc X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.75,637,1330923600"; d="scan'208";a="209433500" Original-Received: from 108-161-115-152.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([108.161.115.152]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 08 Dec 2012 18:29:36 -0500 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id D821A58D3B; Sat, 8 Dec 2012 18:29:35 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <87hanx19bl.fsf@gnu.org> (Chong Yidong's message of "Sat, 08 Dec 2012 12:01:18 +0800") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 206.248.154.182 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:155386 Archived-At: > Is this an accidental commit of a local experiment? As far as I can > tell, setting `set-mark-default-inactive' to non-nil is pretty much the > same as disabling Transient Mark mode. (See also Bug#10964.) Oh, yes, it was indeed a local experiment. > Should we simply delete this option? I think so, yes. Better would be to finish the experiment and replace transient-mark-mode with it, but I don't have time to do that now. Stefan