From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Robert Pluim Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Implicit assumptions in the latest discussions Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2020 16:01:17 +0200 Message-ID: References: <1bc3251a-7b36-f151-7fc6-9ecf2639bb9f@grinta.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="23117"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Emacs developers To: Daniele Nicolodi Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Sep 17 16:18:18 2020 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 1kIujo-0005sW-97 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 17 Sep 2020 16:18:16 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:47518 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kIujn-0006j5-7X for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 17 Sep 2020 10:18:15 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:36638) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kIuTX-0001jp-RD for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 17 Sep 2020 10:01:27 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-wm1-x331.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::331]:33197) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kIuTR-0000fr-Ov for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 17 Sep 2020 10:01:27 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-wm1-x331.google.com with SMTP id e11so4521201wme.0 for ; Thu, 17 Sep 2020 07:01:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:gmane-reply-to-list:date:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=qPm69wfGfUs1in3JfVGTYMYIL+IDTVR0wxRxswk0Z9I=; b=tNMPx7SPM3Uuw890h41ffvvF2leROBrTSZEC527glgSV70r0FryDTFgYnMh7i0tIUH QtjS3TpQt41+KjT5QO95RhIMQXso0O5TfGnspU6gEC+4OKJWkz9vmD7DhttvPOa7tang S73ue3SxZmkRYVTuimlrpZn6QY7mwNhy8yMPzGs/cvgzo+fgJ7/Q/8ZDcexSY5DsSWBW KF0Qm/cYqVgHYr6GXmVbpKeuGVozwc6Zz3H2xcS5HrxXETQsXYvIytamsclRaIPi284K 48S82W5a3KD4VDT2kkBXD2t/cxfvRl4ymhXBhEiJpFtQ0MJKcCnk0bgTpkaDRxv+fxUr oMXg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:references :gmane-reply-to-list:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding; bh=qPm69wfGfUs1in3JfVGTYMYIL+IDTVR0wxRxswk0Z9I=; b=jRDH2t0I0obQO+93MEQTXqZqIrb5aBM3+JGcD5jnCEvukNV/JHZaTFxog6Iks6cz5/ hI5KN5j1qfRU5RveU+GiiYz2O9PFUAYQGQm+9XKoQsfPKCt5HnabZDhKE1Nj972eafM3 lqRQJxIF80BV14UNTIyIqyyELtK6NrIMmyoFw/J4+7FC8lHC/4pmvfW5Qb4I1U7jI6R6 yVGYy7jEvKKp5f8n+ZliHSf876PhjDLvaxUw7cDM3M/zuYW8SEpzILfmJOg8pmu6Z9AH 8DiYcccG7Jii7tkuj0sNXfO3NfRo5cGgRRXJKVCNUmx5tPbcyyPNvaNqVZUhosuWkDXk uZJw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533WAWqm9qgy53su5wD+qlZYUAcLMwnjETTj2aZ1TgzBDwMebonM GgZHyUd1dJz+blSJ/cYWX6lT33pPWRE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzAkDb0U/lfrJEBoHbBK6i3nnPTQFKMTAxBmr8VB05I4fNdEaWEBVNEnSA7xdn8KicHJ0GR2g== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:f619:: with SMTP id w25mr9941259wmc.62.1600351279077; Thu, 17 Sep 2020 07:01:19 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from rpluim-mac ([2a01:e34:ecfc:a860:99bb:88d4:2cf6:2ab9]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u12sm11335937wrt.81.2020.09.17.07.01.18 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 17 Sep 2020 07:01:18 -0700 (PDT) Gmane-Reply-To-List: yes In-Reply-To: <1bc3251a-7b36-f151-7fc6-9ecf2639bb9f@grinta.net> (Daniele Nicolodi's message of "Thu, 17 Sep 2020 15:30:48 +0200") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::331; envelope-from=rpluim@gmail.com; helo=mail-wm1-x331.google.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: No matching host in p0f cache. That's all we know. X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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:255998 Archived-At: >>>>> On Thu, 17 Sep 2020 15:30:48 +0200, Daniele Nicolodi said: Daniele> Hello, Daniele> I admit I just read a minimal part of the posts in the current= threads Daniele> about making Emacs simpler, or friendlier, or more "modern" (f= or a Daniele> definition of modern very different to mine). However, I would= like to Daniele> express my doubts about the assumptions implicit in these disc= ussions. Daniele> These assumptions seem to be: Daniele> 1. Emacs would be better if it had a larger user base or the E= macs users Daniele> would be better served by an Emacs that appeals to a larger us= er base. I Daniele> think that this can be true only as far as another assumption = hold, Daniele> namely that with a larger user base there would be more manpow= er to work Daniele> on Emacs itself, thus Emacs will become better because more pe= ople is Daniele> hacking on it. Daniele> I don't think there can be any correlation between the number = of users Daniele> of Emacs and the number of hackers interesting in working on i= t. If the Daniele> end goal is to make Emacs development more sustainable, an eas= ier way to Daniele> get there would be to modernize the development practices used= to work Daniele> on Emacs itself. However, this is a much harder (social) probl= em to solve. You=CA=BCre falling into the "the 'modern' gitlab/github etc dev practices are better" fallacy here. They=CA=BCre more *familiar* to certain people, but I don=CA=BCt really like them, because too much of the interaction is done with a browser (and I=CA=BCm sure I=CA=BCm not alone). See discussions= on this list about moving to such workflows whilst ensuring that email can still be used. Daniele> 2. Users are not drawn to try Emacs because what Emacs is and = for his Daniele> reputation, but because they expect Emacs to be like other edi= tors. Daniele> I think that who chooses Emacs, does so because of what Emacs = is and Daniele> what it has been in its long history, not because they expect = something Daniele> different. If they expect something different, Emacs has an en= ormous Daniele> technical disadvantage compared to younger editors that are ba= sed on Daniele> different technologies and that do not want (need?) to keep Daniele> compatibility if an incredibly long history. Daniele> Probably there are better thing that can be done to make the e= xperience Daniele> of these users better than providing "simplified" Emacs enviro= nments, Daniele> because the users that choose Emacs don't want a simplified Em= acs, they Daniele> want better ways to access the power of Emacs. Daniele> Having "simplified" modes also poses the problem of allowing t= he users Daniele> to "graduate" from the simplified environment to the full blow= n one. I Daniele> haven't see this discussed. I think "simplified" is not the goal here, but "more familiar". Unlike development practices, I see no issue here with offering that kind of experience by default, since I can turn it off easily. The "graduation" problem exists, but that=CA=BCs easily solved with documentation :-) Daniele> 3. Emacs is perfect as it is, but the users do not understand = it. Daniele> I feel that a lot of the discussions are centered toward havin= g ways to Daniele> simplify Emacs to make it more appealing to new users or to so= me very Daniele> specific classes of prospective users. Wouldn't it be more pro= ductive Daniele> and wouldn't it be better for who already has invested in Emac= s (namely Daniele> the current users) to discuss ways to make Emacs better for ev= eryone? Daniele> For example, GNU/Linux is the platform where Emacs should run = best, Daniele> however, as far as I know, there is currently no way to run Em= acs on a Daniele> Wayland compositor, and Wayland is the future of graphical int= erfaces on Daniele> GNU/Linux. Also, some of the complexity of hacking on Emacs, c= omes from Daniele> supporting a wide range of graphical toolkits. Wouldn't it be a Daniele> worthwhile goal to support a graphical toolkit that works on W= ayland, Daniele> and then make it the only one supported (at least on GNU/Linux= ) and Daniele> redirect some hacking energy into making this solution a good = solution Daniele> for everyone (hacking on the toolkit itself if necessary)? Thi= s would be Daniele> much more important to keep Emacs relevant in a few years from= now than Daniele> a Emacs-simplified-mode. There=CA=BCs an effort underway already to port emacs to 'pure' gtk, which allows running directly on Wayland. See eg . Daniele> While the use of a specific graphical toolkit may seems a tech= nical Daniele> issue far from the current discussions, I would like to point = out that Daniele> also this is mostly a "social" issue: removing support for oth= er Daniele> toolkits will affect those that for one reason or another pref= er to use Daniele> Motif Emacs. There are people who are very attached to using the Lucid toolkit, and they have valid reasons. Once the 'pure' gtk is in, there=CA=BCs no reason to remove Lucid support, but there'd also be no reason to enhance it. Robert