From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lennart Borgman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 12:35:33 +0200 Message-ID: References: <87631jvpzg.fsf@gmail.com> <4C18211C.3070106@harpegolden.net> <87vd9j5neu.fsf@kfs-lx.rd.rdm> <83sk4misf2.fsf@gnu.org> <83iq5hiiin.fsf@gnu.org> <83fx0lihov.fsf@gnu.org> <838w6cixma.fsf@gnu.org> <83y6ech1oo.fsf@gnu.org> <83ocf8gx7e.fsf@gnu.org> <83fx0jgxk7.fsf@gnu.org> <83eig3gspa.fsf@gnu.org> <83bpb7gp2g.fsf@gnu.org> <837hlvglvh.fsf@gnu.org> <834ogzglaj.fsf@gnu.org> <8339wjgg8w.fsf@gnu.org> <83y6eagb7g.fsf@gnu.org> <83vd9eg9j1.fsf@gnu.org> <83r5k2g1qa.fsf@gnu.org> <83eig1g21p.fsf@gnu.org> <83aaqpfu1m.fsf@gnu.org> <838w69f61l.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1277116566 20783 80.91.229.12 (21 Jun 2010 10:36:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 10:36:06 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , Stefan Monnier , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Juanma Barranquero Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jun 21 12:36:04 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OQeMF-00059A-Pj for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 21 Jun 2010 12:36:04 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60618 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OQeMF-0003n1-5E for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 21 Jun 2010 06:36:03 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=38533 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OQeM8-0003lp-4g for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Jun 2010 06:35:57 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OQeM6-0001MK-Qx for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Jun 2010 06:35:55 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-yw0-f192.google.com ([209.85.211.192]:41632) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OQeM6-0001MF-Kp; Mon, 21 Jun 2010 06:35:54 -0400 Original-Received: by ywh30 with SMTP id 30so2732511ywh.24 for ; Mon, 21 Jun 2010 03:35:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:mime-version:received:in-reply-to :references:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=3mWjBj+mIbUPU0kzQuxY/cC3/rPeoxOrx2esBJYuRoc=; b=q5KSnZbNdpIfjv3Nu2WD4y2DqLbMT/1A6GUhgIPWkxfA+EOpf7lZkmah9sBCpGwiYM tadih6PaftBxz3zOlseDlARaXzD7KRl0xBB5tW4kAaLtLr4rP6ftwcuEke77q0RdebRE s0w7X9FHcou4BYHaR5ocZK6iNkC6qmb+lDLiY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; b=GeMTQFyJGxJkiqTJvEmhG+/FJlAYoX75fUdE4vJFr8AhYboOCI1SK1L8x7Yeyc3As5 mv7oh63KhXGybXmk24rmTGIU757g+hhDgUV3/id5Zv/WIg3qzffBDjmpjxzsR0wr6yn1 2HTB60UskYlgyazyz/taLWFDsgB3wfyBY4HBU= Original-Received: by 10.101.97.6 with SMTP id z6mr3534192anl.176.1277116553112; Mon, 21 Jun 2010 03:35:53 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.100.154.15 with HTTP; Mon, 21 Jun 2010 03:35:33 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:126294 Archived-At: On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 11:59 AM, Juanma Barranquero wrote: > On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 11:31, Lennart Borgman > wrote: > >> Juanma said that I should explain my patch more carefully to you. I >> did, but I do not think I have seen any answer to that at all from >> anyone. > > Mine was a general comment (and/or recommendation) about the process > of sending patches up for discussion, trying to explain my *personal* > view of why your proposed changes are sometimes overlooked (at least, > from your point of view; I would substitute for "not well > understood"). > > Eli is not bound by my requests, or anyone else's. So please stop > saying "Juanma asked me to do X, I did and I got no answer from person > P" (for values of P different of "Juanma"). Sorry, I was not trying to imply that you did support my view. I just followed your advice to see if it could help and noted the result.