From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: ECB
Date: Sat, 03 Jul 2004 14:21:43 -0400
Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org
Message-ID: <E1Bgp8x-0003kQ-R0@fencepost.gnu.org>
References: <E1BgSBv-0007jS-W4@fencepost.gnu.org> <40E5A52D.2000104@gnu.org>
Reply-To: rms@gnu.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org
X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1088878965 9660 80.91.224.253 (3 Jul 2004 18:22:45 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 3 Jul 2004 18:22:45 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Sat Jul 03 20:22:39 2004
Return-path: <emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org>
Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244])
	by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
	id 1Bgp9r-0006GR-00
	for <emacs-devel@deer.gmane.org>; Sat, 03 Jul 2004 20:22:39 +0200
Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165])
	by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
	id 1Bgp9r-0002sq-00
	for <emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org>; Sat, 03 Jul 2004 20:22:39 +0200
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33)
	id 1BgpBj-00070v-FQ
	for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Sat, 03 Jul 2004 14:24:35 -0400
Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33)
	id 1BgpBK-0006gh-BV
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Jul 2004 14:24:10 -0400
Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33)
	id 1BgpBI-0006fR-Va
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Jul 2004 14:24:09 -0400
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BgpBI-0006f6-PZ
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Jul 2004 14:24:08 -0400
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1Bgp8y-0007HB-PK
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Jul 2004 14:21:44 -0400
Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.34)
	id 1Bgp8x-0003kQ-R0; Sat, 03 Jul 2004 14:21:43 -0400
Original-To: Jason Rumney <jasonr@gnu.org>
In-reply-to: <40E5A52D.2000104@gnu.org> (message from Jason Rumney on Fri, 02
	Jul 2004 19:10:53 +0100)
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:25420
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:25420

Does speedbar have any advantages over ECB?  In other words, if
we replaced Speedbar with ECB, would we lose anything?
If so, could those features be added to ECB?

Having both ECB and Speedbar would be duplication, and in general
it is better to avoid duplication when there's no good reason for it.