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: Differences between ibuffer and dired Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 03:02:52 +0200 Message-ID: References: <871vbmnaxk.fsf@escher.home> <38165C775CE64A828DB8008B087373F7@us.oracle.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1278032610 16789 80.91.229.12 (2 Jul 2010 01:03:30 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 01:03:30 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Juri Linkov , Stephen Berman , emacs-devel@gnu.org, Deniz Dogan To: Drew Adams Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jul 02 03:03:28 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 1OUUf4-0005zN-Lv for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 02 Jul 2010 03:03:23 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56295 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OUUf3-0004c5-VM for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 01 Jul 2010 21:03:22 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=42752 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OUUex-0004WZ-75 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Jul 2010 21:03:16 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OUUev-0008LM-Dl for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Jul 2010 21:03:15 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-iw0-f169.google.com ([209.85.214.169]:46589) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OUUev-0008LA-9T for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Jul 2010 21:03:13 -0400 Original-Received: by iwn2 with SMTP id 2so1440678iwn.0 for ; Thu, 01 Jul 2010 18:03:12 -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 :content-transfer-encoding; bh=KLz1PM8rLcqLMeumZQeNIWWaVZhGEZH51eDVDNjMg5s=; b=wuQCgwT/QEfkmzS0BTCS4Rm0D61UmjMqzKBEXg61IzXImZQAj4H4qSpzVs2PVpTi6X 6bnl/PpiPe1v7TAaq8CjEOKkBeCLxXOZzcI8AckoZVMQJA31AyiNcDxPO7Que6AQgwRa XJ+Mzc46Mj4sbtcLt/wypaWcUbakXNMR0KB+I= 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:content-transfer-encoding; b=Sp/4A18zQFB0LjB8M6a2p7d+XLJYtxeXVb9M0sYJosqUByBJhLDNM3G5rGHL0RgH+k Io5QqCSz5J5rWuhjGsPTW06UrDIbA2fo9LMz8yW3IMMqfoHfaaMDC2NxIUrPO5dJkpmu 8f+3S9S+596v1NLx/Ry1eN2Nfg/G16pAlnO4g= Original-Received: by 10.231.36.9 with SMTP id r9mr316284ibd.105.1278032592156; Thu, 01 Jul 2010 18:03:12 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.231.172.210 with HTTP; Thu, 1 Jul 2010 18:02:52 -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:126669 Archived-At: On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 2:38 AM, Drew Adams wrote: >> >> While we are looking at this: >> > >> > You mean making some keys more consistent between ibuffer >> > and dired? =C2=A0See Subject line. >> > >> >> Wasn't there a discussion before about putting ibuffer on C-x C-b? >> > >> > ? No connection with the current subject. >> > >> >> I don't remember, someone had something to >> >> say about this. Was it Juri? >> > >> > 1. Why? >> > 2. Why would you bring that up here, in this discussion? >> >> I think you want to say that for you it is easier to keep those >> subjects separate. I can try to remember to respect that, but for me >> it is easier to do it the way I did it here. >> >> There are simply different thinking styles. > > _I_ think I want to say that you introduced a different subject. =C2=A0An= d that > subject would be better discussed in a different thread. Yes, I know that. > That point I made is not about thinking styles. > It's about mailing-list organization and etiquette. I know that too, and I agree, but maybe we think differently about what should be exceptions. (Some messages from you recently made me think so.) > Use any thinking style you like. =C2=A0FWIW, I appreciate your thinking s= tyle. Oh, thanks. All our thinking styles are needed. I am very glad we do different things so we can try to sum it up to something better than each of us can do alone. (It is not only about the amount of work we put in.) > But > please try harder not to hijack threads (yes, we are all occasionally gui= lty of > that). I will try, but to me it seems most important to not hijack the thread if things are complicated. But I know from here and daily conversations that we are all very different when it comes to this. > FYI - Today alone, you also injected a proposal to add a new menu-bar men= u to > consolidate all minor-mode menus into a thread about possibly including > anything.el in Emacs. =C2=A0No connection. No connection for you. Yes. But for me it is a natural response to the question where to put the menu. Answering and proposing another way at the same time saves time in my opinion. Or should I say in my thinking/conversation style. But this style does not always work. All centrally involved in the discussion must be prepared for it. Otherwise it is, as I think you suggest, disorganizing. > Except perhaps that something you read in > one of that thread's mails reminded you that you had proposed that menu b= efore, > so you proposed it again. =C2=A0It's OK to bring that up again, but pleas= e just use a > new thread. That would defeat the purpose here. > This is a pattern, and IMHO it's not helpful. =C2=A0Should we be reduced = to having > just one thread for everything, entitled "poubelle", "catch-all", "X" or > "Lennart"? I am not sure which name is best. > Think about it, please. =C2=A0Even in your thinking style you might reali= ze that your > new topics will be better treated and easier to find later if you keep th= em > separate. I think we mostly forget old threads. What I did try here was to link things in a way that made both subjects more understandable. > It's easy to do. =C2=A0Copy as much of the original context that made you > think of the new topic as you want. =C2=A0Just change the Subject line so= we know > what the topic is. =C2=A0Thx. Yes, it is good to do, but this was such a small thing in my opinion. I did not really want to start a discussion about my suggestion, just mention it in context. (Discussion about menu related things tend to lead nowhere and I believe it is partly because we are not prepared for the discussion since menus has not been mentioned in contexts where it could have been appropriate.)