From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: checkdoc (was: mh-e 6.2 imminent) Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 14:19:39 -0500 Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <200210210726.g9L7QI1l014171@gbr.newt.com> <200210231948.g9NJmdBG015635@gbr.newt.com> <200210240725.g9O7PKI11467@rum.cs.yale.edu> <200210240928.g9O9Sjs12808@rum.cs.yale.edu> <5x65vsozso.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> <20021024144551.GA9747@gnu.org> <5xsmyvolsh.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> <5xvg3qyiqp.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> <5x7kg4dcr7.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035832803 5216 80.91.224.249 (28 Oct 2002 19:20:03 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 19:20:03 +0000 (UTC) Cc: miles@gnu.org, monnier+gnu/emacs@rum.cs.yale.edu, miles@lsi.nec.co.jp, wohler@newt.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, mh-e-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 186FQZ-0001L2-00 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 20:19:55 +0100 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 186FUp-0006RA-00 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 20:24:19 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 186FRJ-0006DL-00; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 14:20:41 -0500 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 186FQN-0005hT-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 14:19:43 -0500 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 186FQJ-0005eA-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 14:19:42 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 186FQJ-0005dm-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 14:19:39 -0500 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.10) id 186FQJ-00070h-00; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 14:19:39 -0500 Original-To: storm@cua.dk In-reply-to: <5x7kg4dcr7.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> (storm@cua.dk) Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:8850 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:8850 Yes, but I still feel we could spend our time better on other things than renaming and creating aliases for 300+ faces -- if the _users_ will never see the difference (as Miles pointed out, customize adds "Face" to the face name if its missing... You may be right. But we can still document a convention for this, for the future. One interesting question is, are there cases where ending a face name with -face is actually beneficial? What do people think?