From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lars Ingebrigtsen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#29550: 27.0.50; `not-modified' should be disabled by default Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2019 10:01:48 +0200 Message-ID: <87pnjjsf83.fsf@gnus.org> References: <83y2y7fu05.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="14021"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: self@gkayaalp.com, Stefan Kangas , 29550@debbugs.gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Sep 29 10:02:29 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iEUA1-0003WQ-4N for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 29 Sep 2019 10:02:29 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:37316 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iEU9y-0001rf-VS for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 29 Sep 2019 04:02:27 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:56897) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iEU9m-0001rJ-3p for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 29 Sep 2019 04:02:16 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iEU9h-0001hr-Rc for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 29 Sep 2019 04:02:11 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:43331) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iEU9a-0001fA-87 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 29 Sep 2019 04:02:04 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iEU9a-0006rd-5d for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 29 Sep 2019 04:02:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2019 08:02:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 29550 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch Original-Received: via spool by 29550-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B29550.156974411526008 (code B ref 29550); Sun, 29 Sep 2019 08:02:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 29550) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Sep 2019 08:01:55 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52152 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iEU9S-0006l6-K2 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 29 Sep 2019 04:01:54 -0400 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51]:48074) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iEU9Q-0006jI-OT for 29550@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 29 Sep 2019 04:01:53 -0400 Original-Received: from cm-84.212.202.86.getinternet.no ([84.212.202.86] helo=marnie) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iEU9N-00068p-26; Sun, 29 Sep 2019 10:01:51 +0200 In-Reply-To: <83y2y7fu05.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sun, 29 Sep 2019 10:20:58 +0300") X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 209.51.188.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:167618 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: > The basic controversy here, from my POV, is that I use "emacs -Q" a > lot when working on bug reports, and having this command disabled by > default will be a nuisance because I use it VERY often. Taking us poor people who work on Emacs into consideration is nice, but shouldn't we prioritise how this works for the users? I mean, the same argumentation could be used for a number of disabled commands, like `narrow-to-region' which I use a lot and always have to re-enable when I'm working in -Q. And `not-modified' is much more dangerous for users than `narrow-to-region', especially since it's bound to a key people may hit by accident (`M-~'), while `narrow-to-region' is much more difficult to do so with. -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no