From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rogerio Senna Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Apologia for bzr Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2014 18:30:39 -0200 Message-ID: References: <20140103152117.GA16679@c3po> <20140104082857.GA22010@thyrsus.com> <20140105205645.GA12781@thyrsus.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bdc8e869676bc04ef8f7bbc X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1389299447 20707 80.91.229.3 (9 Jan 2014 20:30:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2014 20:30:47 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jan 09 21:30:52 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1W1MFg-0000xz-3f for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2014 21:30:52 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53976 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W1MFf-0001fm-K4 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2014 15:30:51 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53838) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W1MFY-0001dN-Ow for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2014 15:30:45 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W1MFX-00040U-Ag for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2014 15:30:44 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-wg0-x22b.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c00::22b]:36043) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W1MFX-00040M-0w for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2014 15:30:43 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-wg0-f43.google.com with SMTP id k14so3282961wgh.10 for ; Thu, 09 Jan 2014 12:30:41 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type; bh=gUH/QDLFbvm5SqNCpBEkijAjRtumMsSb75JQpZFZ+gY=; b=ONYb4J9EcrD1iIMPAUXdzEINkLtubJgANYUKl6Ym5UwdfBmZGj0NrS582LY1CBekbw aemrZdfFiQsL5rKVT7vpGhZ5MNuRacOh05fTDoHkTcsmoIIUCcDYB55AVGrf53mIr28b CKhbWqQY3MkKLYW3OXpgObl4NSr9kvVYlUwMd/Yy/cdyDPh1S/o7G5HlKV8h7O85FM98 AZoRwf9887kVLlFVfKmuKu9voDsJiIw7h/bATI/WddapWdYsedo+LSlqsKcfEamy0GCT x+FAF4iuBpBEkwRpaDNZPt/UWNe70XLAmq+t3TvYSmHYUAElbkJ8YB3DO6/+PXimUWgR QWug== X-Received: by 10.194.80.137 with SMTP id r9mr4786252wjx.88.1389299439660; Thu, 09 Jan 2014 12:30:39 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.216.139.72 with HTTP; Thu, 9 Jan 2014 12:30:39 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20140105205645.GA12781@thyrsus.com> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 3A39PBQKNGUbj-92EYMOmZF0HRw X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2a00:1450:400c:c00::22b X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:167975 Archived-At: --047d7bdc8e869676bc04ef8f7bbc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 6:56 PM, Eric S. Raymond wrote: > Richard Stallman : > > In regard to windows, buffers and frames, we could have a mode of > > operation which ties each buffer to a one-window frame. That would > > eliminate a lot of complexity. > > > > We could even offer that as the mode of use for beginners, if that > > would make it easier for a new generation of hackers to become Emacs > > users. I don't know whether it WOULD have that effect, but if it > > would, I think it is a good idea. > > I'm somewhat doubtful this would be well-directed effort. In my > experience, he complexity that beginners react badly to is not > multi-window/multi-buffer, it's 1,001 spiky keystroke sequences. > I couldn't help but notice that this (having each buffer tied to a single frame) really sounds like One On One Emacs . --047d7bdc8e869676bc04ef8f7bbc Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On S= un, Jan 5, 2014 at 6:56 PM, Eric S. Raymond <esr@thyrsus.com> wrote:
Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>:
> In regard to windows, buffers and frames, we could h= ave a mode of
> operation which ties each buffer to a one-window frame. =A0That would<= br> > eliminate a lot of complexity.
>
> We could even offer that as the mode of use for beginners, if that
> would make it easier for a new generation of hackers to become Emacs > users. =A0I don't know whether it WOULD have that effect, but if i= t
> would, I think it is a good idea.

I'm somewhat doubtful this would be well-directed effort. =A0In m= y
experience, he complexity that beginners react badly to is not
multi-window/multi-buffer, it's 1,001 spiky keystroke sequences.

I couldn't help= but notice that this (having each buffer tied to a single
frame) really= sounds like One O= n One Emacs.
--047d7bdc8e869676bc04ef8f7bbc--