From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Visit New File menu item Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2016 18:03:51 +0200 Message-ID: <83k2l6fjq0.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87oaaldk94.fsf@russet.org.uk> <87r3fhoslg.fsf@fastmail.fm> <5bbe5c17ea420ab05bb8b71d0305e7d1.squirrel@cloud103.planethippo.com> <83shzvf3ha.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1457885102 6377 80.91.229.3 (13 Mar 2016 16:05:02 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2016 16:05:02 +0000 (UTC) Cc: joostkremers@fastmail.fm, emacs-devel@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org, phillip.lord@russet.org.uk To: "John Wiegley" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Mar 13 17:04:56 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 1af8Vj-0000ce-RI for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 13 Mar 2016 17:04:55 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36630 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1af8Vj-00078e-1o for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 13 Mar 2016 12:04:55 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50755) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1af8VP-00075s-Ei for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 13 Mar 2016 12:04:36 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1af8VO-000382-FF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 13 Mar 2016 12:04:35 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:39686) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1af8VJ-000365-Hw; Sun, 13 Mar 2016 12:04:29 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:4227 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1af8VB-0001o1-9Y; Sun, 13 Mar 2016 12:04:21 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from John Wiegley on Sat, 12 Mar 2016 20:00:05 -0800) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e 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:201598 Archived-At: > From: John Wiegley > Cc: phillip.lord@russet.org.uk, rms@gnu.org, joostkremers@fastmail.fm, emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2016 20:00:05 -0800 > >>> It's not a correction of a bug, it's a new feature. So I think it should go >>> to master. >> >> How is that? I understood it to just be changing the text "Open New File" to >> "New File", and related textual changes. > > Indeed, examining d457fd9dc782465e1547f74021390c9d5951d6fa, it does not > qualify as a feature, but a minor correction. It isn't a correction, because the original text was not an omission. It was a deliberate decision, which took the "New File" alternative (as well as a few others) into consideration. It's okay to revisit that decision, but such changes should not be done during a pretest, no matter how simple they look: you never know what baggage they could bring with them, and pretest must not change behavior, unless required to fix a bug. Also, such changes should be discussed more thoroughly, waiting for interested parties to chime in. E.g., one problem with "New File" is that we don't actually enforce the "new" part -- you can visit an existing file via that menu item. Not sure how important this nit is, but OTOH that single word "Visit" is also hardly so very important that we should rush making the change overnight. Besides, there were also suggestions in this thread to change other menu items. If agreed, it makes sense to do all those changes together, as part of revamping the menus; having only one of them on the release branch makes much less sense. In any case, such a change should be in NEWS.