From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: Differences between ibuffer and dired Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 07:26:00 -0700 Message-ID: <562356F759744F228AAD6ED2EC0F26B7@us.oracle.com> References: <69E59DE2835E43CAB86ECA7160F7BB9F@us.oracle.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1278080795 31009 80.91.229.12 (2 Jul 2010 14:26:35 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 14:26:35 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 'Emacs-Devel devel' , 'Lennart Borgman' , 'Deniz Dogan' To: Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jul 02 16:26:31 2010 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 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OUhCI-0001ns-DK for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 02 Jul 2010 16:26:30 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50310 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OUhCH-0003Yi-Pr for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 02 Jul 2010 10:26:29 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=47804 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OUhC9-0003Xc-R3 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Jul 2010 10:26:22 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OUhC8-0006Pd-Lf for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Jul 2010 10:26:21 -0400 Original-Received: from rcsinet10.oracle.com ([148.87.113.121]:48834) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OUhC8-0006PK-GB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Jul 2010 10:26:20 -0400 Original-Received: from acsinet15.oracle.com (acsinet15.oracle.com [141.146.126.227]) by rcsinet10.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.2) with ESMTP id o62EQGYQ007278 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 2 Jul 2010 14:26:17 GMT Original-Received: from acsmt353.oracle.com (acsmt353.oracle.com [141.146.40.153]) by acsinet15.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.1) with ESMTP id o625oP8I012478; Fri, 2 Jul 2010 14:26:13 GMT Original-Received: from abhmt012.oracle.com by acsmt354.oracle.com with ESMTP id 391728981278080761; Fri, 02 Jul 2010 07:26:01 -0700 Original-Received: from dradamslap1 (/141.144.168.139) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Fri, 02 Jul 2010 07:26:00 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: Thread-Index: AcsZvw27PUIWktXQS7GRBGbjS4mV+AAM1YRw X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5931 X-Source-IP: acsmt353.oracle.com [141.146.40.153] X-Auth-Type: Internal IP X-CT-RefId: str=0001.0A090207.4C2DF706.0176:SCFMA4539814,ss=1,fgs=0 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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:126699 Archived-At: > There, I think I said it much better this time. Do you agree? Do I agree you said it much better this time? You said something different. You said what you said clearly each time. Do I agree with a suggestion to provide different downloadable versions/skins of Emacs for people to experiment with? I have no comment on it, other than to repeat that such experimenting would be no substitute for discussion about whether and how to actually change Emacs. It seems that you agree about that: > The trunk will develop exactly like it always did, with healthy > discussions for each change. That was my only point. I thought this thread was leading to a discussion about a proposed change. My bad if not. If your point was only about providing some code for people to try then I have no special comment on it. Whether you put experimental code for people to try on a GNU site or on Emacs Wiki or some other place, I have no objection, personally. It's fine for people to try different prototypes etc. It's not unusual for someone to post a link here to code that people can try, to get an idea about some suggestion. You can go try Aquamacs, for instance, and see whether some aspects of its UI (or whatever) inspire good ideas for adoption by Emacs. But any such ideas should still be discussed here in order to be adopted. Whether experimental code to try out takes the form of a snippet, a library, an entire Emacs source tree, or an Emacs executable for some platform, the general idea is the same. As for myself, I will not be downloading a source tree or branch and building Emacs from C, whether to test a "real" pretest or to try out someone's idea of a nifty new look and feel. I might try loading a Lisp library or two to try something that is being proposed and discussed, but I will not be building Emacs to see whether I think your key bindings or whatever are a good idea. Just speaking for myself about that, and I'm not typical in that respect. Perhaps most people discussing here will build your skinned versions and play with them.