From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=93scar_Fuentes?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Concern about new binding. Date: Tue, 02 Feb 2021 19:47:41 +0100 Message-ID: <87tuqunw6q.fsf@telefonica.net> References: <20210202134950.vybbpf3iewbymfjo.ref@Ergus> <20210202134950.vybbpf3iewbymfjo@Ergus> <87zh0mmr54.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="17392"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:1ND0Q27EXGgZhhpOfbkE/ln7GOA= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Feb 02 19:48:49 2021 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 1l70jI-0004RP-UX for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 02 Feb 2021 19:48:48 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57250 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l70jI-0003Oi-1H for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 02 Feb 2021 13:48:48 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:56106) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l70iQ-0002yv-OX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Feb 2021 13:47:54 -0500 Original-Received: from ciao.gmane.io ([116.202.254.214]:57072) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l70iM-0003Wu-Mh for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Feb 2021 13:47:52 -0500 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.io with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1l70iI-0003Hg-Ef for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Feb 2021 19:47:46 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Received-SPF: pass client-ip=116.202.254.214; envelope-from=ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; helo=ciao.gmane.io X-Spam_score_int: -15 X-Spam_score: -1.6 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.6 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:263736 Archived-At: Kévin Le Gouguec writes: > Ergus writes: > >> I suppose this should have been discussed previously, unless I don't >> find the thread... > > See bug#46151. > > IIUC the initial request was to have a way to revert shell output > buffers; somewhere along the way the usefulness of a global binding for > revert-buffer was brought up, various options were discussed, a decision > was taken, and here we are. The title of that bug report is "Set revert-buffer-function in shell command output buffers", no hint about discussing global keybindings. So the effective policy is that either one reads each and every message in emacs-bugs (which probably requires too much time even for some of the most active emacs developers and would be a waste of time for the most part) or be left excluded from such debates.