bug#16114: 24.3.50; wishlist (enhancement request): easier way for users to customize mode lines

bug#16114: 24.3.50; wishlist (enhancement request): easier way for users to customize mode lines

[Drew Adams]

Users who are familiar with Emacs Lisp have learned how to customize
(modify) mode lines.  But doing that is not so straightforward, and the
desire to have different mode lines is not something limited to Lispers.

Please extend Customize to make it easier to customize mode lines, or
provide some other, user-friendly way to do this.

In GNU Emacs 24.3.50.2 (i686-pc-mingw32)
 of 2013-11-28 on LEG570
Bzr revision: 115271 rgm@gnu.org-20131128203155-qjc1xsp19z2k64b2
Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 6.1.7601
Configured using:
 `configure --enable-checking 'CFLAGS=-O0 -g3' CPPFLAGS=-DGLYPH_DEBUG=1'

bug#16114: 24.3.50; wishlist (enhancement request): easier way for users to customize mode lines

[Drew Adams]

This bug was merged with bug #4833.

I disagree with the formulation of bug #4833, or at least its characterization as having to do with customization.  Whether
or not the mode line is sufficiently ergonomic is different
question from whether it is easy enough for users to modify.
There is no need to make this into an all-inclusive
refashion-the-universe request.

Plus, the difficulty of customization is tacked onto the end of
bug #4833, seemingly as an afterthought ("What's more...").
The bulk of that bug report is about the makeup of the mode line
not being sufficiently ergonomic.

Leave it at that; split these two enhancement requests: one for
easier customizing, another for better ergonomics.  If they both
get worked on (together or in either order) then any interplay
between them can be taken into account at that time.

Bug #16114 should be limited to trying to make it easier for
users to modify mode lines.  Another enhancement request (e.g.
#4833) can address possible ergonomic improvements.

No specific ergonomic improvements were proposed in bug #4833
anyway (just complaints about length and relative positions,
AFAICT, which is OK), so that wish is fairly unspecified.

Glomming even more onto the same enhancement request is silly,
and it just makes it all the more likely that nothing will ever
be done to improve things (in regard to either customization or
ergonomics).  Easier customization is already a big enough job.