From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Uday S Reddy Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: line-move-visual Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 19:38:17 +0100 Organization: Janet Usenet Reading Service. Message-ID: References: <87pr07qjio.fsf@thinkpad.tsdh.de> <878w6vq7ew.fsf@thinkpad.tsdh.de> <871vcmhq79.fsf@wivenhoe.ul.ie> <580d5f23-e251-483f-9752-7e77b1ca2fb7@40g2000pry.googlegroups.com> <2a7dc148-e2cc-4681-9d8c-ccd1140aa6d7@j36g2000prj.googlegroups.com> <089883ee-0a63-4cb4-a0ec-d2fe4e71cc03@y18g2000prn.googlegroups.com> <87wruco5yq.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <87wrubfd8p.fsf@rapttech.com.au> <848w6ndwn0.fsf@cs.bham.ac.uk> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1291830827 6650 80.91.229.12 (8 Dec 2010 17:53:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2010 17:53:47 +0000 (UTC) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Dec 08 18:53:43 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PQOD1-0007uU-Pa for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 08 Dec 2010 18:53:43 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36089 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PQOD1-0007wx-7e for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 08 Dec 2010 12:53:43 -0500 Original-Path: usenet.stanford.edu!news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!news2.euro.net!xlned.com!feeder3.xlned.com!feeder.news-service.com!tudelft.nl!txtfeed1.tudelft.nl!dedekind.zen.co.uk!zen.net.uk!hamilton.zen.co.uk!feed4.jnfs.ja.net!jnfs.ja.net!times.reader.netnews.ja.net!not-for-mail Original-Newsgroups: gnu.emacs.help,comp.emacs,comp.lang.lisp Original-Lines: 39 Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: acws-0068.cs.bham.ac.uk Original-X-Trace: north.jnrs.ja.net 1276195097 25294 147.188.194.56 (10 Jun 2010 18:38:17 GMT) Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@north.jnrs.ja.net Original-NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 18:38:17 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812) In-Reply-To: Original-Xref: usenet.stanford.edu gnu.emacs.help:178807 comp.emacs:99978 comp.lang.lisp:288912 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:75737 Archived-At: Mark Crispin wrote: > The notion of "community-owned software" works as ideology, but not as > reality. If emacs was really community-owned software, I as a community > member could revert the change in the official distribution sources. > And then there could be revert wars ala Wikipedia. Exactly! By "community-owned", I don't mean community-developed. There needs to be control and discipline etc in the development team. Otherwise, there will be chaos, and mission-critical fitness will go out of the window. By community ownership, I only mean that all the people that have a stake in the system have a voice in the matter and we all feel ownership of the system. When the community is divided, as seems to be the case on this issue, the developers have to make a decision and move on. In any case, I think we have reached a point where you and Stefan need to talk to each other directly and sort it out. In my humble opinion, it is easy to argue that the current default was ill-chosen. But it is not so easy to argue that it should be changed. If we change it, then we face all the same issues all over again affecting the other users that are depending on the current default. So, it seems best to leave things as they are and make a note of all the lessons learned. > But even the laymen become power-corrupted. I think that is a bit of an exaggeration. They have a responsibility to bear and sometimes they get carried away. > Since user interface surprise is a barrier to upgrade, they make sure > there aren't any such surprises. Yes, that point is well-made. But, the same argument now suggests that the default should not be changed yet again. Cheers, Uday