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: [PATCH] About the :distant-foreground face attribute Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 17:38:20 +0200 Message-ID: <83txd545n7.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87bnzo9cja.fsf@gnu.org> <59B7E7FC-48D0-4737-B1BB-FFAC5BA9E07A@swipnet.se> <874n5f3162.fsf@gnu.org> <83fvozf86g.fsf@gnu.org> <87r48javwe.fsf@gnu.org> <83bnzmfjxe.fsf@gnu.org> <52D3E689.6050902@dancol.org> <8E16225F-53EF-498A-AB35-66EB9B33B859@swipnet.se> <52D43360.6050605@dancol.org> <9BD01B88-AF13-44DD-8DBE-4598BAC136DD@swipnet.se> <52D45C73.6090906@dancol.org> <52D4EBA9.8050802@swipnet.se> <52D4F2C2.8080800@dancol.org> <52D504A7.80104@swipnet.se> <52D514FF.7010404@dancol.org> <52D52312.6070106@swipnet.se> <52D58632.3010106@dancol.org> <381DEBDC-71D8-4FAC-BA55-897FEC73A2FC@swipnet.se> <52D5A072.5010508@dancol.org> <064CFFB5-6E50-40D5-B2CB-2BECC656D93F@swipnet.se> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1389800321 3144 80.91.229.3 (15 Jan 2014 15:38:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 15:38:41 +0000 (UTC) Cc: jan.h.d@swipnet.se, dancol@dancol.org, cyd@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jan 15 16:38:46 2014 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 1W3SYG-0000Qm-A9 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 16:38:44 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:55565 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W3SYF-00076g-UT for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 10:38:43 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:60149) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W3SY8-00076M-UX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 10:38:41 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W3SY4-0002jz-1o for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 10:38:36 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout20.012.net.il ([80.179.55.166]:34602) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W3SXy-0002iJ-In; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 10:38:26 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout20.012.net.il by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0MZG009008PSC000@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 17:38:25 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0MZG009RF8S0B910@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 17:38:25 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 X-Received-From: 80.179.55.166 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:168462 Archived-At: > From: Stefan Monnier > Cc: Daniel Colascione , Eli Zaretskii , Chong Yidong , emacs-devel > Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 23:22:34 -0500 > > > Well, my position is not to revert, so by doing that nobody is happy. > > Why is that good? Anyway, as I said before, this is Stefans call. > > But I always assumed we are talking post-release here as your code > > clearly don't belong in a feature freeze. Again, Stefans call. > > In the short term, indeed, Daniel's patch is too new for 24.4. > But in the longer term, I like the idea of being able to write Elisp > code to fine-tune the colors. > > So the :distant-foreground might not be useful after 24.4. > > IOW, if we keep it for 24.4, I think we should hide it so we can remove > it later. Not sure how to do that, tho. > > What do you guys think? How about changing just the name of the attribute for now? We could then keep the implementation, and after the branch extend it to accept more flexible forms as the value of the attribute. Then we will both fix the original bug, and avoid the risk of introducing short-lived, non forward-compatible attributes.