Re: Cleaning up and structuring user-emacs-directory

[Gunnar Horrigmo <horrigmo@runbox.no>]

Amin Bandali <bandali@gnu.org> writes:

> The pros of the XDG Base Directory approach suggested by Gunnar include
> the proposed behaviour by Emacs conforming to the XDG Base Directory
> spec, which has been seeing adoption among GNU/Linux applications.  Its
> cons would include `user-emacs-directory' no longer being the one-stop
> shop for the user's Emacs files, a more significant departure from
> Emacs's traditional behaviour.

I don't see that as a con, since I want all my configuration files under
version control. Having my configurations seperate from all of emacs'
own configurations is less hassle (even if it's easily dealt with).


> I'm personally leaning towards the former, somewhat more conservative
> approach, but could see the arguments for the latter as well.  I'm
> interested in hearing other folks' thoughts and opinions, and other
> pros/cons they can think of.

I prefer the XDG way, as that makes it neater and easier to simply put 
~/.config under version control, and pretty much be done with it.

Would it be out of the question supporting both (via a
--old-school-config or somesuch (or new-school for that matter :)))?

-- 
Gunnar