From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dmitry Gutov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [Emacs-diffs] emacs-25 f8208b6: Document the user-level features of the Xref package Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 00:11:57 +0300 Message-ID: <5692C91D.7040509@yandex.ru> References: <20160109191428.26341.44105@vcs.savannah.gnu.org> <5691C9D2.7080905@yandex.ru> <83egdpmo1j.fsf@gnu.org> <56929D6F.2050508@yandex.ru> <834melmfa4.fsf@gnu.org> <5692B1E0.8010100@yandex.ru> <831t9pma4e.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1452460345 8110 80.91.229.3 (10 Jan 2016 21:12:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 21:12:25 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Jan 10 22:12:18 2016 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 1aINHe-00077u-44 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 22:12:18 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:49406 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aINHc-0007bO-Vm for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 16:12:16 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55261) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aINHQ-0007bJ-PG for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 16:12:05 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aINHL-0002jJ-PI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 16:12:04 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-lf0-x230.google.com ([2a00:1450:4010:c07::230]:34693) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aINHL-0002jF-Hf; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 16:11:59 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-lf0-x230.google.com with SMTP id 17so1018368lfz.1; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 13:11:59 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=L7fO7H6AqitTDgWiSMbaM4QeOzxGjM9nY8Vm3PJvyIk=; b=MIFYNk6sPSjoHUE5Kl6hw6y5Mlq1NuPGz8IuDfdo4fv7gVJMqBgM3JXmb4R61PztdM 4liz0D8PuXDz2+72/jOx8sNus14vGMrSSUf59C2oU9gwchh23rLeDzWkn2N7RXCaX7nD Sn2E2NmCjTnkI70fK0Y+du1yt/LERNdkZpXJlHb7sgIK3CkAGywBvJ7DqO6l2zhNwBjM Zsdp52QiOIHQhCcb3+Oaq+mDT1IQJjuyUVnxooWapSGh/FFJNuK2c5N+t7h08gZ91fWN jG7XiUnuUKWuBlJjbI2N8fVChkg4CU+qPcwjVHo5Pq51fCaTcVsxVc0LeYImQZsERrn/ qh0A== X-Received: by 10.25.39.8 with SMTP id n8mr1633089lfn.117.1452460318936; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 13:11:58 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from [192.168.1.190] ([178.252.127.222]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id qa9sm13971616lbb.40.2016.01.10.13.11.57 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 10 Jan 2016 13:11:57 -0800 (PST) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:43.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/43.0 In-Reply-To: <831t9pma4e.fsf@gnu.org> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2a00:1450:4010:c07::230 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:198002 Archived-At: On 01/10/2016 11:51 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > Can you propose an alternative conceptual framework for the user > manual, wrt to backends and the features described in this section? Before I try answering this, please confirm that you've already read my brief attempt at doing it, here: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2016-01/msg00695.html Starting with "I'd prefer something like". Is it at all relevant to what you want to see in response? You haven't replied to the "dired-specific version of this command" part of that email either.