>
> I'd find it quite surprising, since an errant edit to any open file 
> would prevent the server from exiting after the last client stops. While 
> leaving the server running isn't the worst thing ever (indeed, that's 
> how it works now), I'd want the logic for when the server exits to be as 
> simple as possible, i.e. "when there are no more clients, exit" 
> (provided the user has confirmed as necessary). Having the server stick 
> around because I forgot to save one file would surprise me, mainly 
> because it would typically happen after, well, I forgot something.
>

I see.  We have different mental models, I guess.  From my viewpoint the 
Emacs server should stay there until it's not necessary, and I'd be 
surprised to be queried about what to do with buffers opened of processes 
started in a frame I already closed when I want to close another frame. 
But of course I do not object to have both behaviors.

>
> That's pretty much what I started with, actually. I've added more to 
> that as I find corner cases, and as I try to make my code work well 
> under different configurations so that it could merge into Emacs if 
> there's interest.
>

I attach a patch for that other behavior, it works fine AFAICS.