Re: files.el: Patch to make project-settings optional/customizable

[Dan Nicolaescu <dann@ics.uci.edu>]

Chong Yidong <cyd@stupidchicken.com> writes:

  > Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com> writes:
  > 
  > > Dan> If no, what is the advantage of having this name customizable?  
  > > Dan> What happens if different projects using different names?
  > > Dan> It seems that it would just bring in complications...
  > >
  > > Yes, this makes the feature less useful, by making it not work
  > > automatically across projects.
  > 
  > I think it's generally good policy to avoid hardcoding file names.  

But general policy should not be applied without thinking about the
particulars of each case.
As Tom said, there were some long discussions about this, and I think
that the opposite conclusion was reached _for this particular case_.
Just undoing that decision without reviewing the previous discussions on
this does not seem like a good idea.

  > The default is unchanged, so the feature still works automatically
  > across projects unless you change it.  People who care enough about
  > changing the default presumably know what they are doing

Then shouldn't we first wait for such people to say that they want such
a feature and show us why?
Configurations is good only if it has some benefits, what is the benefit
in this case?
Adding more knobs to turn just increases the complexity of emacs...