Re: should search ring contain duplicates?

[Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>]

	I think that for most uses of a history it makes no sense to keep
	duplicates. I'd vote for making the default value be t and letting those few
	modes where duplicates might make sense (e.g. shell-mode?) bind it to nil
	unless the user has explicitly specified otherwise.

	IOW the option values could be:

	 nil            - means never remove duplicates
	 t (default)    - means remove duplicates, but this can be
			  overridden by a mode (e.g. shell-mode)
	 non-nil, non-t - means always remove duplicates (never override)

When I responded to this one, I must have been thinking about this
one.  It appears that I forgot about this one afterward, and
remembered only the other complex proposal about properties.  I
apologize for the confusion.

Both this and the proposal about properties are too complex.

Even if these features were desirable in general, now would be the
wrong time for them.  We are close to being ready for pretest.
Please propose only things that MUST be done before the release.