From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ihor Radchenko Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: New Package for NonGNU-ELPA: clojure-ts-mode Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2023 12:34:06 +0000 Message-ID: <87edjijcn5.fsf@localhost> References: <87il9kksqz.fsf@dfreeman.email> <97224c4f-fad4-ae01-46c1-5755d97d9a92@gutov.dev> <87fs3ztq38.fsf@localhost> <87cyz3qwba.fsf@posteo.net> <8734zztmiz.fsf@localhost> <87sf7zqs3l.fsf@yahoo.com> <87il8vs6e7.fsf@localhost> <87jztbqrc9.fsf@yahoo.com> <877cpbs5a0.fsf@localhost> <87fs3zqqgj.fsf@yahoo.com> <874jkfs4o0.fsf@localhost> <87y1hroz47.fsf@posteo.net> <83cyz2ctp0.fsf@gnu.org> <87msy6rzeg.fsf@localhost> <83wmxab0ym.fsf@gnu.org> <87v8cuqg8d.fsf@localhost> <871qfiozc7.fsf@yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="15586"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Eli Zaretskii , dmitry@gutov.dev, jschmidt4gnu@vodafonemail.de, philipk@posteo.net, stefankangas@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Po Lu Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Sep 01 14:34:33 2023 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 1qc3M8-0003rW-Nv for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 01 Sep 2023 14:34:32 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qc3LO-0007DM-Qt; Fri, 01 Sep 2023 08:33:46 -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 1qc3LM-0007BY-Sb for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 01 Sep 2023 08:33:44 -0400 Original-Received: from mout01.posteo.de ([185.67.36.65]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qc3LK-0001Qn-25 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 01 Sep 2023 08:33:44 -0400 Original-Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4DFB924002A for ; Fri, 1 Sep 2023 14:33:40 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1693571620; bh=+v2/Xr+wg8YVCsqnKFFLLbi9p2Cr2Tkw3cwfMH+6QH8=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:From; b=ZCzTTl4xYTqF4DpQwy2TNTfO78dmYr60p9QYFzcnFlOgIhwwatmQDU4ED0FiTQ9Ti Y6ZyFwXRfOF3AvGK8RE0ChwPmhzU3NpHw1W0vfOmE93wackqQxaAzzrS0D3FjZwTCt XmC/SGMXK/8dFGe1MXqJFjsYKqBc0V+7EnOiHqa0CiRNgxhqmz84DH4S9TF8pi3U1p yeldgeue+UYxhbXoWA5tiHN9kheLfYcZWEF5/XdnBDDyAnqYmxpwP9GpNNS9vB2j09 CB6rZzjpRKKG9Vt7U8bAHhGdOv1vaPfeyJze+VnK8KDoEQfxIz1EES4krOulB9Onr3 xHMSadJpNCPtg== Original-Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4Rccrz1yQfz6tw9; Fri, 1 Sep 2023 14:33:39 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <871qfiozc7.fsf@yahoo.com> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.67.36.65; envelope-from=yantar92@posteo.net; helo=mout01.posteo.de X-Spam_score_int: -43 X-Spam_score: -4.4 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action 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:309769 Archived-At: Po Lu writes: > Ihor Radchenko writes: > >> I do not find much difference when reading Github discussion from >> browser vs. from email. They are equally flat in both cases, sometimes >> creating confusion. It is also not too different in IRC, IMHO; and, as >> IRC shows, it can be solved, even given the flat structure limitations, >> using appropriate community conventions. > > That's your opinion, which is not shared by the majority of those who > read news or mail. > > If I had not quoted your message, or introduced suitable references into > its headers, would you be capable of establishing which message this is > meant to reply to? Just asking. In my message, I did say that quoting is a good practice in Github as well. That's not about Github. That's about discussion conventions. At least some repositories make use of message quoting in the messages to clarify what each message is replying to. This tends to happen in more complex issue discussions with multiple points being discussed. I am not sure what you are trying to argue about. My statement was referring to Github discussions that follow good practices. Github or mailing list - bad messaging practices make things unreadable. It is not about Github, it is about the community practices. -- Ihor Radchenko // yantar92, Org mode contributor, Learn more about Org mode at . Support Org development at , or support my work at