From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: John Wiegley Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Questioning the new behavior of `open-line'. Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 15:16:57 -0800 Message-ID: References: <87vb98csu1.fsf@red-bean.com> <87fv0cm64g.fsf@gmx.us> <87si4bsktk.fsf@red-bean.com> <87wptnlbl6.fsf@gmx.us> <87pozfl2ut.fsf@gmx.us> <87d1vfl17p.fsf@gmx.us> <878u63p6sh.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87pozfchq6.fsf@red-bean.com> <87h9komkty.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87ziydbgnd.fsf@red-bean.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1447802291 25987 80.91.229.3 (17 Nov 2015 23:18:11 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 23:18:11 +0000 (UTC) Cc: kfogel@red-bean.com, dak@gnu.org, olopierpa@gmail.com, bruce.connor.am@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Richard Stallman Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 18 00:18:10 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 1ZypVo-0005fz-2y for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 18 Nov 2015 00:18:08 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:32833 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZypVn-0002SN-HE for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 17 Nov 2015 18:18:07 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:46444) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZypVb-0002Ep-25 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Nov 2015 18:17:55 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZypVa-0004Oq-C8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Nov 2015 18:17:55 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-pa0-x235.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400e:c03::235]:35920) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZypVW-0004O8-7h; Tue, 17 Nov 2015 18:17:50 -0500 Original-Received: by pacdm15 with SMTP id dm15so23032108pac.3; Tue, 17 Nov 2015 15:17:49 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:date:message-id:references :user-agent:mail-followup-to:mime-version:content-type; bh=mFB0I7kbRblA4gYH9gm5xXWxL4MNqjWu9lH4FpM6Mz4=; b=KRhyvjGDW9Z/rVr5J2WAEmhKC6V8Oelg6nxpXMf/Prz73uEyhJX98Kh3civuVEb17v sQvBSh64Ix8SctEJ8JBXhF7HaJqT9UCTXPlqtSUd86RrBjdFWeIBMWtLCEJNid8BAPKV 5/grUTECVKqqNnIYiZfoZikhl03xqmE7+tb108M3J5u1Q5HLgevlZLg0NKggn+TvPIkT ovngzcZvhu0TP3ttnRwxli/ogyrU+NJrlLxL5CH71gdKtmRgTHxcjB3igZrifmzrbAu3 Keg6yKeTzt7a7SZyqgkAn16l5iH840bQhoeyQCsOj4plxDlPVWR0DTryGlkv0TtOtbmS 70qA== X-Received: by 10.66.233.73 with SMTP id tu9mr67300656pac.52.1447802269666; Tue, 17 Nov 2015 15:17:49 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from Vulcan.local (76-234-68-79.lightspeed.frokca.sbcglobal.net. [76.234.68.79]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ck9sm45107524pad.28.2015.11.17.15.17.47 (version=TLS1 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 17 Nov 2015 15:17:47 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Original-From: "John Wiegley" Original-Received: by Vulcan.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id E68921088ACA7; Tue, 17 Nov 2015 15:17:46 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Tue, 17 Nov 2015 17:57:41 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (darwin) Mail-Followup-To: Richard Stallman , kfogel@red-bean.com, dak@gnu.org, olopierpa@gmail.com, bruce.connor.am@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:400e:c03::235 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:194678 Archived-At: >>>>> Richard Stallman writes: > This might be a good thing to poll the users about. Since we're discussing a change in behavior from past versions, and many of us have come to rely on that behavior, I would rather we simply revert to previous behavior for "C-o at 0" in 25.1. John