From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jean Louis Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#50743: Emacsclient not tested vs. Local Variables prompt Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2021 17:35:38 +0300 Message-ID: References: <25731.1632610542@alto> <83zgrzontw.fsf@gnu.org> <6d2a81e7-778f-719f-9a35-04a8ef388366@gmx.at> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="31057"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Mutt/2.0.7+183 (3d24855) (2021-05-28) Cc: mkupfer@alum.berkeley.edu, Phil Sainty , jidanni@jidanni.org, 50743@debbugs.gnu.org, larsi@gnus.org To: martin rudalics Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Sep 27 16:38:40 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@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 1mUrmB-0007lV-4E for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 27 Sep 2021 16:38:39 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60454 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mUrm9-0004Di-OI for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 27 Sep 2021 10:38:37 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:46202) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mUrlc-00045B-Fe for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Sep 2021 10:38:07 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:59009) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mUrlb-0000xR-5D for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Sep 2021 10:38:04 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mUrlb-00084k-0k for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Sep 2021 10:38:03 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Jean Louis Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2021 14:38:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 50743 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: moreinfo Original-Received: via spool by 50743-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B50743.163275342830946 (code B ref 50743); Mon, 27 Sep 2021 14:38:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 50743) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Sep 2021 14:37:08 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:42321 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mUrkh-000834-OR for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 27 Sep 2021 10:37:08 -0400 Original-Received: from stw1.rcdrun.com ([217.170.207.13]:45061) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mUrke-00082I-1z for 50743@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 27 Sep 2021 10:37:04 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost ([::ffff:102.87.51.42]) (AUTH: PLAIN admin, TLS: TLS1.3,256bits,ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) by stw1.rcdrun.com with ESMTPSA id 0000000000037FE9.000000006151D709.00000AE9; Mon, 27 Sep 2021 07:36:57 -0700 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6d2a81e7-778f-719f-9a35-04a8ef388366@gmx.at> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:215671 Archived-At: * martin rudalics [2021-09-26 12:23]: > > And if you set server-raise-frame to nil, the "problem" happens in > > both cases, right? > > > > So I'm not sure this is a bug. The user should switch to the correct > > frame to answer the question. On my system, there's a prominent > > indication that the client frame needs my attention, but even if there > > isn't, the user should be vigilant enough to type the response into > > the right frame. > > > > If we do want to somehow raise the frame earlier, we should do it > > conditioned by server-raise-frame, because some users don't want the > > frame to raise and get input focus. But it isn't clear to me where > > would be the correct place to raise the frame "earlier". > > Maybe 'server-raise-frame' does too much when it triggers > 'select-frame-set-input-focus'. Still I consider it a bug when the user > gets prompted and the frame displaying the prompt doesn't have focus. I can fully understand that viewpoint, though there are special users' configuration where focus shall remain all time on specific window or some windows should be always raised, like "on top of everything" and anything else appearing would come under. And I will know when it happens or if there is some problem I will personally know, and I assume that users similar to me would not have real problem with it. Giving you just insights as I use such Window Manager options all the time since years. Jean Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns: https://www.fsf.org/campaigns In support of Richard M. Stallman https://stallmansupport.org/