From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Confused by y-or-n-p Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2021 12:13:21 -0500 Message-ID: References: <834kkcr1eo.fsf@gnu.org> <87y2hhri3n.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <83pn2tkfg8.fsf@gnu.org> <871rf7ippu.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <83a6trg6mc.fsf@gnu.org> <87im8f951f.fsf@gnus.org> <83lfdacapo.fsf@gnu.org> <83wnwsbuwp.fsf@gnu.org> <87mtxo4tph.fsf@gnus.org> <838s962iso.fsf@gnu.org> <83pn2i0zds.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="37530"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: rms@gnu.org, juri@linkov.net, rudalics@gmx.at, stefankangas@gmail.com, larsi@gnus.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org, drew.adams@oracle.com To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Jan 06 18:14:16 2021 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 1kxCO0-0009ew-4T for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 06 Jan 2021 18:14:16 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38886 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kxCNz-0003ii-5h for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 06 Jan 2021 12:14:15 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:36798) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kxCNI-0003IV-Jl for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Jan 2021 12:13:32 -0500 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:39098) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kxCNG-0007op-Fk; Wed, 06 Jan 2021 12:13:31 -0500 Original-Received: from pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 477F480381; Wed, 6 Jan 2021 12:13:28 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id C058D80608; Wed, 6 Jan 2021 12:13:22 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1609953202; bh=QbB525MooSew1qlGLW31qxqxPo7jptiEnVTZYPjx/uQ=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=U5PsU+BhU/R3wtL+0/TWjrfEVv3viAGTZZfRA7GmXkpzPE3X4HGfIfuKvAQP5+/K+ 5MA9V+yO+lVKTntTnRlsVw4hQ1IoAdenQdlfPGTABk7b/XazAfE4vscwDh7nKggj1A XTiSmVAkEUW/4E360lOmLK3+c2rn77Wx3vDVyoxmo1YgKwra6tmO3ZWOe1ebFnzTDQ 6/AKlAvCwrRzLl4pae0ZHsvzW8FyO4E20vEIw82j4AdHlvZv1N+xOp6schVUkbwUzM mWW9JaDL940HK5KNZiLEd/rNraQDxBsg1qBQ0G8jQSw8YbvGE/XnY+aCJHzV4Woeua S8qmzApZRHqnA== Original-Received: from alfajor (unknown [45.72.224.181]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 46E921204A2; Wed, 6 Jan 2021 12:13:22 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <83pn2i0zds.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Wed, 06 Jan 2021 19:05:35 +0200") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, 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: 2.1.23 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:262621 Archived-At: > It wasn't clear you were proposing a trial _after_ installing a > change. If people who complain about a change agree to the trial > suggestion, it may work, but then what exactly did we change from what > we have now? And as you well know, people who complain about this > stuff want it reverted NOW. That's the crux of my suggestion: we reply "yes you want it now, but maybe you won't want it any more in two months time, so give it a chance". Stefan