From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Stefan Kangas Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Namespaces - summary, conclusion Date: Mon, 4 May 2020 13:38:34 +0200 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="28029"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Emacs developers To: Philippe Vaucher Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon May 04 13:41:03 2020 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 1jVZT4-0007At-Qw for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 04 May 2020 13:41:02 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:47800 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jVZT3-0005fL-TS for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 04 May 2020 07:41:01 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:49884) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jVZQu-00032z-1u for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 04 May 2020 07:38:48 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-yb1-f170.google.com ([209.85.219.170]:33925) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jVZQs-00080R-Qp for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 04 May 2020 07:38:47 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-yb1-f170.google.com with SMTP id q206so7872349ybg.1 for ; Mon, 04 May 2020 04:38:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=GpzlSFejFHeOfKgDnmKBlC7FQTLfkh4jzjVgOF9H8QQ=; b=XSuY6xxbsHYGFRNrlbnxFZhj45KnI4ZX9g+95ZtwUCzUa0TQmfJOIUNDYpUs0jZgAa FnNtvZLakHcqgOGKl7ODHpG97C16eT9PIkQyUbxMANpKRL9v9g4frps4O8lucWTTkP5e iXCASS9mMyXYZN0JQKNAVV84xBc3lv6YkUJDpAihBqzozKES1osxHSjkM1d7W0SgUXYU s0Q2sybS4qnpRMN8FzHNffnINtDlUIrLQMpc+fjRaPvo18lqRQCUJbIq8eZfFXtNvVxb yUgQRE3RXP2sD8daafaaTYc2xJ2hHNUaIbhfQ6e/9PMz3FmXeoARKQMoqsDx5reZXqGm +LHw== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0Pua39DW4tBY7bADwIrEMMigKGk/yoJLUOozInlhrC+8wI6E+jML5 8CXUppi8TSjTZ+EmL4pztPyh5ditZ2RiEY+UXr4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypJVkKC5QYfkOOkpUKEK1VcIAFWnujDKN9FgXFWmkt4HutRbAw9868EXJThtCXhILjLMxZko++LlSp+QEmqbMKo= X-Received: by 2002:a25:5c4:: with SMTP id 187mr13261491ybf.181.1588592325371; Mon, 04 May 2020 04:38:45 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.219.170; envelope-from=stefankangas@gmail.com; helo=mail-yb1-f170.google.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/05/04 07:38:45 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Spam_score_int: -16 X-Spam_score: -1.7 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.7 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=_AUTOLEARN 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:248809 Archived-At: Philippe Vaucher writes: > Given this is more or less the position held by Alan, Eli, Richard, > Drew and Jo=C3=A3o I think the chances of seeing new aliases is close to = 0. This is not my conclusion. I've seen several calls to move away from from discussing in the abstract to discuss specific, concrete examples. I think this is a good idea, since IMHO the abstract discussion is likely exhausted. There is always the chance that some of the proposals will be voted down. But also consider that some who have disagreed with you in the abstract might be more convinced by specific, concrete proposals. > Then there are other discussions going on, like the manual not > offering a "tutorial view" with highlighted examples, but I think > these are other discussions and should be discussed on their own. I think here also concrete proposals would help us move forward. Best regards, Stefan Kangas