From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Proposal: new default bindings for winner and windmove Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2024 16:34:56 +0300 Message-ID: <86zfr1dym7.fsf@gnu.org> References: <8734ot6y38.fsf@yahoo.com> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="38459"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: dmitry@gutov.dev, acm@muc.de, stefankangas@gmail.com, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, dancol@dancol.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Po Lu Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Jul 01 15:35:24 2024 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1sOHBk-0009h4-Ej for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 01 Jul 2024 15:35:24 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sOHBW-0003EA-6t; Mon, 01 Jul 2024 09:35:10 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sOHBS-0003Dk-Tk for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Jul 2024 09:35:08 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sOHBP-0008IW-Up; Mon, 01 Jul 2024 09:35:03 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=RzIxfLYVhdHkrMKjYhOGg0ONA7eZmeODl8PIwRyRqjI=; b=jaf2F3W5oQ7f GGE0hvNU/HwI0d8MWrSDCUFP9PNo0EmDsuvqEh1nq518PW4yD9+AzevX1wehqQXPJlNkTiMaYWQTo YRNkAb7zJxDcgGaqs4szI07Mi/fxKLO2KcpYCGR5s2iRURxovBYK028mbgoYrqSi9r7TpnAzdMNzE 67uDKkKCqYuEWaSVQqksnKwsdkxHK4FMl8pr27EWyahpgK0pfWEggip41GUpBekAQ2t8HdCXbY6J9 aer0g2IC+8dzk9EXaQNxW9DrwcJtbmoYgJoxI0TMJ6Wyn9z/TrUQ1CC4tyCGARJGjZE+XnFSmMGlF s0d9XfMDo3Km0RTA6tSUpg==; In-Reply-To: <8734ot6y38.fsf@yahoo.com> (message from Po Lu on Mon, 01 Jul 2024 21:28:11 +0800) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:321021 Archived-At: > From: Po Lu > Cc: Alan Mackenzie , Stefan Kangas , > Stefan Monnier , Daniel Colascione > , emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2024 21:28:11 +0800 > > Dmitry Gutov writes: > > > People screaming "backward compatibility" for each and every reason > ^^^^^^ > > can indeed be a problem. > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > Is this what it comes down to? That certain people, by implication, > Emacs users, are potentially problems? I would be exceedingly careful > where I take this discussion from hence. I really don't understand why you-all keep reiterating the same arguments, on and on. The real decision about this will not be affected by repeating old arguments, then posting counter-arguments, etc. etc. Just let it go. The Emacs maintainers are fully capable of making the decision without hearing these repetitions. In fact, I'm pretty sure we've already decided.