Re: [Emacs-diffs] master 16748a5 1/2: Add colors to faces that lack them.

Re: [Emacs-diffs] master 16748a5 1/2: Add colors to faces that lack them.

[Eli Zaretskii]

I'd suggest to discuss any changes to face defaults before they are
committed.  People tend to be sensitive to that, and the current
defaults are generally a result of more or less prolonged discussions.
Besides, faces can easily be customized, so the fact that you don't
like the default can be easily fixed on your systems, without
affecting everyone else.

Thanks.

Re: [Emacs-diffs] master 16748a5 1/2: Add colors to faces that lack them.

[Sam Steingold]

> * Eli Zaretskii <ryvm@tah.bet> [2017-11-03 22:22:19 +0200]:
>
> I'd suggest to discuss any changes to face defaults before they are
> committed.  People tend to be sensitive to that, and the current
> defaults are generally a result of more or less prolonged discussions.
> Besides, faces can easily be customized, so the fact that you don't
> like the default can be easily fixed on your systems, without
> affecting everyone else.

My apologies if the change inconveniences someone.
My excuse is that the default values for those faces were trivial.
(IOW, those faces were displayed identically to the default face).
I thought that it was a simple oversight, similar to not using
inheritance (fixed in a previous patch - separately specifically to make
the face change subject to a possible discussion or modification).
I would never think of changing a non-trivial user-visible default
without a discussion beforehand.

Thanks.

-- 
Sam Steingold (http://sds.podval.org/) on darwin Ns 10.3.1504
http://steingoldpsychology.com http://www.childpsy.net http://www.dhimmitude.org
http://www.memritv.org http://jij.org http://islamexposedonline.com
Illiterate?  Write today, for free help!

Re: [Emacs-diffs] master 16748a5 1/2: Add colors to faces that lack them.

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Sam Steingold <sds@gnu.org>
> Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2017 09:50:44 -0500
> 
> My excuse is that the default values for those faces were trivial.
> (IOW, those faces were displayed identically to the default face).
> I thought that it was a simple oversight

It likely wasn't, IME.  But I don't really know, and I don't use Gnus,
so I will now shut up and let Gnus users speak up.