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 11:44:26 -0500 Message-ID: References: <834kkcr1eo.fsf@gnu.org> <83czyvkts6.fsf@gnu.org> <87bleetirr.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <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> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="31416"; 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 17:46:21 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 1kxBwz-00083K-C5 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 06 Jan 2021 17:46:21 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:37802 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kxBwy-00031K-EW for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 06 Jan 2021 11:46:20 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:56894) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kxBvG-0001sK-N8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Jan 2021 11:44:36 -0500 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:17528) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kxBvE-0002Lz-6E; Wed, 06 Jan 2021 11:44:33 -0500 Original-Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id CB359100240; Wed, 6 Jan 2021 11:44:29 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 42C65100091; Wed, 6 Jan 2021 11:44:28 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1609951468; bh=/L+iHQiQB75cN6NtkYxYF22vQSjcGj84chwLSQ36fes=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=VNqGdEa0NLZ5iA+3fa3D1uJ53RghOWi30qeYa59i7RR7Mmgtx8gNn5B6XpvzhRt++ dbE5aXJwepAws/JC5qAhOU7/9qKAkI5SZNW3MGxuKbqFUuO+ax0yFYDJCUuO0Iv6mr KGpReJ3Ujy0NG+0u0cuml8h6iqJ05wROx3BBzOXATkiAmMGnjlopjzl7yHrMqb/NVN ZDSg6ISXemoDTYs4a9Mc4aKUNGQhxanZ9fZUn8uleqGOiWNHBApBsj6xkM5CWddVWo VAFEKGa3p2btfRzNWKisRc3VmufDbKy7pdN+gwbPVFXpw8DenxjAM3wbBgIXn8ySt8 HpK98cCUojKHw== Original-Received: from alfajor (unknown [45.72.224.181]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ADCD3120205; Wed, 6 Jan 2021 11:44:27 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <838s962iso.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Wed, 06 Jan 2021 17:20:55 +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:262616 Archived-At: >> > So I think such changes should be introduced with: >> > - An explicit announcement. >> > - A clear way to get back the old behavior. >> > - A trial period in the order 2-3 months. >> >> Fine with me. > > Fine with me, if someone volunteers to do this job. Failing that, > definitely not fine with me, as I cannot afford adding this to my > current burden of Emacs maintenance. Not sure how others interpreted what I wrote, but AFAIK none of the above three points imply extra work (just like you, I don't want extra work). All it does is clarify that we can tentatively introduce changes in defaults and when people complain about a change in UI, we may want to tell them to "try it for a couple month" before deciding it should be reverted. Stefan