From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Daniele Nicolodi Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Implicit assumptions in the latest discussions Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2020 16:45:49 +0200 Message-ID: References: <1bc3251a-7b36-f151-7fc6-9ecf2639bb9f@grinta.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="38027"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.12.0 To: Emacs developers Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Sep 17 16:55:47 2020 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 1kIvK6-0009nK-HW for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 17 Sep 2020 16:55:46 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48286 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kIvK4-00040A-6k for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 17 Sep 2020 10:55:45 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:50162) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kIvAa-0001tv-16 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 17 Sep 2020 10:45:56 -0400 Original-Received: from grinta.net ([109.74.203.128]:57938) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kIvAX-0007Cm-6Y for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 17 Sep 2020 10:45:55 -0400 Original-Received: from black.local (unknown [37.120.217.164]) (Authenticated sender: daniele) by grinta.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2AD32EB75A for ; Thu, 17 Sep 2020 14:45:51 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=grinta.net; s=2020; t=1600353951; bh=R5CX6eDxzfWWe+zc55iNEbFUdEYCzEi2vtCWuBQYRks=; h=Subject:References:From:To:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=n3rF1YmVRzpp8R+SI/Iwkz1p9qmHmrCLeoEWLdP2MKoVPa4dl/zNvYxmqWQKO5MBz rqTzgHg3B697rDFwWtU6RSAytInKWolU13ieryUAWeqjSmGjTUFsKuBEXNPpwktWAq QJG4U1WJbqrmPlsp6feI70aXX/1SCtXa1pvSvYYoYFksF7YGRS6mSkjHrOjoZz0mwU 09CGetB+vpkgsOifYgazlPObvIB8SLbu7vjhvCGbmoOBGQljditBTOxzGzInnLDwBC 4YNG3u6JOe2LCEzVGCv0fe6BwUl86EE+c9RtEPgv88h47jpff4ZOCVJYYuuK30Tgad r8kJQni5+Hb9w== In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Received-SPF: pass client-ip=109.74.203.128; envelope-from=daniele@grinta.net; helo=grinta.net X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/09/17 07:08:52 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action 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:256007 Archived-At: On 17/09/2020 16:01, Robert Pluim wrote: > Youʼre falling into the "the 'modern' gitlab/github etc dev practices > are better" fallacy here. Theyʼre more *familiar* to certain people, > but I donʼt really like them, because too much of the interaction is > done with a browser (and Iʼm sure Iʼm not alone). See discussions on > this list about moving to such workflows whilst ensuring that email > can still be used. I don't know where you got the impression that I am advocating for Emacs to be developed using Gitlab or Github. Advances in software carpentry (a buzzword that nicely encompasses what I am talking about here) best practices in the last 20 years expand to things completely unrelated to the use of Gitlab or Github. Unfortunately, hacking on Emacs still requires obliging to outdated conventions that only stand in the way of contributors. > I think "simplified" is not the goal here, but "more familiar". Unlike > development practices, I see no issue here with offering that kind of > experience by default, since I can turn it off easily. The > "graduation" problem exists, but thatʼs easily solved with > documentation :-) I think that this "more familiar" environment is something that no one has been asking for. Actually, the success of Emacs distributions like Spacemacs seem to suggest that there is a large population of users that actually prefer a "less familiar" (when compared to "mainstream" editing environments) interaction with their editor. > Thereʼs an effort underway already to port emacs to 'pure' gtk, which > allows running directly on Wayland. See eg > . I know, and the effort has been undergoing for years now. What I am saying is that this effort should be probably prioritized and effort should be put into removing barriers for it to land in Emacs as soon as possible. > Daniele> While the use of a specific graphical toolkit may seems a technical > Daniele> issue far from the current discussions, I would like to point out that > Daniele> also this is mostly a "social" issue: removing support for other > Daniele> toolkits will affect those that for one reason or another prefer to use > Daniele> Motif Emacs. > > There are people who are very attached to using the Lucid toolkit, and > they have valid reasons. Once the 'pure' gtk is in, thereʼs no reason > to remove Lucid support, but there'd also be no reason to enhance it. The reason to remove support for obsolete toolkits is that, as long as they need to be supported, Emacs cannot grow any functionality that cannot be implemented with them, new functionalities must be coded against an abstract API that must be grown to encompass them and implemented N times. If substantial effort should be spent to future-proof Emads, wouldn't it better to work with the maintainers of a toolkit of choice to straighten the kinks that make some people prefer to still use ancient toolkits? Cheers, Dan