From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: display-buffer-alist simplifications Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 11:12:34 +0900 Message-ID: <87d3gvqhkd.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> References: <87mxgem09k.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <4E2A7EBD.7050300@gmx.at> <87livooqt6.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <4E2B158B.1080101@gmx.at> <87wrf8iyse.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <4E2BEED2.5040608@gmx.at> <8739hvu6lh.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <4E2C50E6.3020103@gmx.at> <878vrnweju.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <4E2D34D7.4040002@gmx.at> <87r55cjvef.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87sjpsnerd.fsf@mail.jurta.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1311819166 26834 80.91.229.12 (28 Jul 2011 02:12:46 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 02:12:46 +0000 (UTC) Cc: martin rudalics , Chong Yidong , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Juri Linkov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jul 28 04:12:41 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QmG5Y-0006Fr-ES for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 28 Jul 2011 04:12:40 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56672 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QmG5X-0003NU-MK for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 22:12:39 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:60566) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QmG5U-0003NI-US for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 22:12:37 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QmG5T-0006Nj-W2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 22:12:36 -0400 Original-Received: from mgmt1.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp ([130.158.97.223]:41777) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QmG5T-0006Mo-KK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 22:12:35 -0400 Original-Received: from uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp [130.158.99.156]) by mgmt1.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C55C3FA0721; Thu, 28 Jul 2011 11:12:27 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000) id BCB221A26F8; Thu, 28 Jul 2011 11:12:34 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: <87sjpsnerd.fsf@mail.jurta.org> X-Mailer: VM 8.1.93a under 21.5 (beta31) "ginger" cd1f8c4e81cd XEmacs Lucid (x86_64-unknown-linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 130.158.97.223 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:142416 Archived-At: Executive summary: If you do revert, it might be a good idea to tag the last revision with this version of Martin's code in it for ease of experimenting. Juri Linkov writes: > > If so, it might be good to revert everything and postphone > > these changes to 24.2. > > It would be very sad to revert and move development backward. That's not moving development backward! You can debate whether it's appropriate or not, but an explicit decision to revert is moving *forward*: it removes a technical or social blockage to other development. Nor is any code lost. It may be somewhat complicated to untangle the changes now, but the new code is all still there in the repository, and in the future the patch to revert can be applied in reverse again to get you more or less back where you are now. And at any time you want to experiment with this code you can revert your I actually agree with your opinion that reversion is inappropriate for this code, IMNSEO FWIW. I just hate to see people arguing that code that's in a project should stay just because it's already in. That always has the effect of making it harder to conduct such experiments in the first place!