From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Gitlab Migration Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2021 21:47:02 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87h7fcnmq0.fsf@posteo.net> <83tujbqg4j.fsf@gnu.org> <46353190-1190-495f-b15e-22980159b3ab@yandex.ru> <83y28mp0rb.fsf@gnu.org> <51a363db-fde7-791d-cf8d-98ac601d62ee@yandex.ru> <57ca4d78-2339-201d-edce-678c9b003a99@yandex.ru> <01341bd6-b94b-4f94-1461-405e723142ad@yandex.ru> <6198b50c-d47c-fe12-3da0-28bcbb7947ad@yandex.ru> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=Utf-8 Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="35992"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: philipk@posteo.net, danflscr@gmail.com, lokedhs@gmail.com, stefan@marxist.se, emacs-devel@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, eliz@gnu.org To: Dmitry Gutov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Sep 12 03:48:27 2021 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 1mPEbb-0009B4-5d for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 12 Sep 2021 03:48:27 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:54086 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mPEbZ-0003KS-6y for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 11 Sep 2021 21:48:25 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:59412) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mPEaG-0001U6-KX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Sep 2021 21:47:04 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:47994) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mPEaE-0001YQ-OF; Sat, 11 Sep 2021 21:47:02 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mPEaE-0002Y3-9q; Sat, 11 Sep 2021 21:47:02 -0400 In-Reply-To: <6198b50c-d47c-fe12-3da0-28bcbb7947ad@yandex.ru> (message from Dmitry Gutov on Fri, 10 Sep 2021 06:09:29 +0300) 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:274573 Archived-At: [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]] [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]] > C-M-- to redo. One-modifier difference. > Though in my testing I had to bind C-M-_ instead. That's right. You can type C-M--, but it really turns into C-M-_. Same for C--; it really turns into C-_. > I wonder if we should add some mechanism to detect that the user had > called undo-redo in the current session, and then one of his/her undo-s > is going to perform a "redoing" undo You're trying to solve a problem, but I'm not sure precisely what. I think we've made different assumptions and thus are miscommunicating. My idea was to have two options, undo-only and undo-redo, with a way for the user to select one. Initially the default would continue to be undo-only. We would ask users try undo-redo; if they generally like it, we could change the default later to undo-redo. It looks like you're presuming something different (though I am not sure what it is) and proposing a DWIM feature for it, but I can't tell. Would you please spell out both what behavior you're presuming, and what behavior you propose instead? -- Dr Richard Stallman (https://stallman.org) Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project (https://gnu.org) Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://fsf.org) Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)