From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Gregory Heytings Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Concern about new binding. Date: Thu, 04 Feb 2021 16:42:12 +0000 Message-ID: References: <87zh0mmr54.fsf@gmail.com> <87y2g5smya.fsf@gmail.com> <4FF55FBF-573D-4A70-B3FC-682CA25B7ECB@gnu.org> <83lfc53whk.fsf@gnu.org> <20210203180142.seu6o3i6u7jhkyrh@Ergus> <83eehx3to5.fsf@gnu.org> <20210203221628.xgvvxjvh56gyswba@Ergus> <20210204070033.pm4ido4hq7a6twif@Ergus> <83sg6brhyg.fsf@gnu.org> <83eehvre5k.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="26777"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Feb 04 18:38:17 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 1l7ia9-0006rU-5g for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 04 Feb 2021 18:38:17 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:42266 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l7ia8-0002Up-6s for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 04 Feb 2021 12:38:16 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:41638) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l7hi1-0003Xq-UT for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Feb 2021 11:42:21 -0500 Original-Received: from heytings.org ([95.142.160.155]:36600) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l7hhw-0005k5-0T; Thu, 04 Feb 2021 11:42:20 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=heytings.org; s=20210101; t=1612456932; bh=868sqOrvmyIJdadRVDG39epwy46ySNXMNrTFuSk+hng=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:References:From; b=XLhor9Pp3bAlo6ql3c0Jz5CKxmpYofT76NllrMbZykMo4RKi6YsaoTJEmOYAPS2DY Tk/fOQ0laP8JALVsp3NrboTeuMmQV6tBdBvjyd7odVfw1/sU5rOnVjaaz2oYZ/DYd9 64Xkg/uFP7Ul333LltVv81nyjcpqmZAET8w/gOFU7ooms52wRGg7s7sx5pvX1a/UdU BPqgUgDeaJQQSqGllbSJ+JLMK7uHsj4Oq2LP3u2KwyDi57UdGIyj/bHABxTAMCA8wM L6HrNBoAi1dNrTQlPRWWo3IHIL5qQUlpoZ20i0E0LlEBqu6bWxARp4T34anZjN993X ugZPZ+uQ4ns+A== In-Reply-To: <83eehvre5k.fsf@gnu.org> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=95.142.160.155; envelope-from=gregory@heytings.org; helo=heytings.org 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, 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:263887 Archived-At: >>> I'd prefer to find a binding to which people could agree, because that >>> would leave fewer people unhappy. The two candidates proposed till >>> now are "C-x G" and "C-x M-u". >> >> You forgot the proposal to which the mail you are replying to >> explicitly refers. > > No, I didn't forget. I just prefer to solve a problem by the simplest > fix, and introducing a whole new set of bindings seems more complex than > strictly needed. > The proposal is only to use "C-x g r" for "revert-buffer" and C-x g R" for "revert-buffer-with-fine-grain", leaving room for other buffer-related operations. These bindings are also hard to type by accident. The other proposed bindings are there only to demonstrate that the keymap would not remain empty.