From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Juanma Barranquero" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: basic question: going back to dired Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 13:29:27 +0200 Message-ID: References: <4884DC7F.6060406@gmail.com> <819feff4-76e3-4bf8-9ece-7b47f099efc2@j22g2000hsf.googlegroups.com> <87hcaiiatp.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1216726314 12748 80.91.229.12 (22 Jul 2008 11:31:54 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 11:31:54 +0000 (UTC) Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org To: "Bastien Guerry" Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jul 22 13:32:42 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KLG4y-0000Jk-UM for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 13:30:53 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60420 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KLG45-0007w8-K7 for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 07:29:57 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KLG3f-0007st-6J for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 07:29:31 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KLG3d-0007pf-Ca for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 07:29:30 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=56658 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KLG3d-0007pO-9T for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 07:29:29 -0400 Original-Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com ([64.233.182.188]:36227) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KLG3c-0006Kk-Vo for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 07:29:29 -0400 Original-Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id c7so6509000nfi.26 for ; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 04:29:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=dIKVeB7/OBNmvmliB01rw29byTaGfQXoJ6ebe/CrVRU=; b=QVKfGRvrMWSBHP6u+llk6DWDXuyLibceYs1unFT/CeMxxgwXI6Jwh2c/hnD06jugm1 MxJQdvZ/G8a2owxn32q5yuI26gqTB6AqTIVUR4gaZ9x2OU9Uks6qTcxDJIoUtEv8kSBz Lkmcinh3mISvYVp/UmA47QAgBTtrOtLpAD2WA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=RH4cnm/u2s6XjErx+lOW/GiyNAzILy9oCwOZh1Q14p4p0NqWNgl/8aFViqIhwrqR5b 0ss/DTLuL4CU2nYt9In6oXfKTH8+HXBKtftCZQEQYUB0a1kBD/XSQF6ARlyfmU7EFj/c wggEJ5ppZCrzHroWMxf9oH1Fxvp9h2uilm5Ao= Original-Received: by 10.210.109.10 with SMTP id h10mr4126072ebc.194.1216726167997; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 04:29:27 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.210.71.14 with HTTP; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 04:29:27 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87hcaiiatp.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> Content-Disposition: inline X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:55787 Archived-At: On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 10:26, Bastien Guerry wrote: > Adopting Emacs terminology is not good per se, it's good because it > helps people adopt Emacs. Adapting Emacs terminology to current conventions would perhaps be good for the very same reason. I'm not for or against changing Emacs' terminology. I think it would be a huge amount of work. But I don't understand why some people reacts as if the very idea is flawed. There's nothing sacred in "buffer" and "keybinding" and "minibuffer", just history. The change should be susceptible to rational (if perhaps a bit pointless) discussion, because it is not hard to find good arguments for it; "frame/window" vs "window/pane" is a good example. Juanma