From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: chad Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Oop customization group Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2009 09:57:03 -0700 Message-ID: <3B6A5075-E2A6-4979-8365-C167EE98F51F@gmail.com> References: <93AA5CFC-247B-4DD7-9E4E-168F8D6DB7D4@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v935.3) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1244309336 7202 80.91.229.12 (6 Jun 2009 17:28:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2009 17:28:56 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Emacs-Devel devel To: David Reitter Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jun 06 19:28:54 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1MCzhK-0003c2-El for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 06 Jun 2009 19:28:50 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50774 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MCzhJ-0006Hj-9f for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 06 Jun 2009 13:28:49 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MCzCk-0001aI-0g for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Jun 2009 12:57:14 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MCzCe-0001OS-8n for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Jun 2009 12:57:12 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=43162 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MCzCe-0001OF-5K for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Jun 2009 12:57:08 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-pz0-f181.google.com ([209.85.222.181]:49557) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MCzCd-0004p8-Pg for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Jun 2009 12:57:07 -0400 Original-Received: by pzk11 with SMTP id 11so552011pzk.14 for ; Sat, 06 Jun 2009 09:57:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:cc:message-id:from:to :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :subject:date:references:x-mailer; bh=SW9AmqV4wJkGnKEiQh2vcuArSaX9QV6PItrSp4vwC/4=; b=P2OL9LGalLK80GiLqr/bA7oRRif2XXb4hl5H5NfFpPKlCGhlqN7AaEa1wAxCdKX5Di fe8RsV/Pl7EXuxnyqHUnpb6PpWqCySaiQ4WAEmsCo7/pq9Wmxu2NwDk+HYPXo5eI0vx8 fO1Ggx8V0eU8x+S/y8+SrpkBcb0N/dsFApMZ8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=cc:message-id:from:to:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:date:references :x-mailer; b=CQ9cQXIdNstChKcAD4f2s55u+bT/tbULyC03gImwKcvkZSCiDl01XoDbKH9tY++IeQ ms3KTxIvPkcZ1zOgFVo6t66OxRYvBGiccQ9x6djQJ3JI2z0H4p2O0VVsKVtFRxkyvCgh LY0tNKSo2WTmIN5K1M3hZ5JzJabxsI6roCz3E= Original-Received: by 10.142.169.4 with SMTP id r4mr1598850wfe.105.1244307426093; Sat, 06 Jun 2009 09:57:06 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from ?10.0.1.3? (c-98-247-149-76.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [98.247.149.76]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 27sm3740762wff.6.2009.06.06.09.57.04 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sat, 06 Jun 2009 09:57:05 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <93AA5CFC-247B-4DD7-9E4E-168F8D6DB7D4@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.935.3) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 06 Jun 2009 13:28:42 -0400 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:111356 Archived-At: I too find the customize groups a little baffling, and usually end up grep'ing through for likely keywords (or just bypass customize entirely). I imagine that a reorg of these groups would be a welcome but somewhat lengthy undertaking. If the PTB would be interested in such an effort, when would be the right time? I imagine that it's too late to get t in before the next release... *chad On Jun 6, 2009, at 5:24 AM, David Reitter wrote: > Also, I don't think the structure of these groups is very well > though out: