From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Change in emacsclient behavior Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2007 02:39:08 -0400 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1188542369 14757 80.91.229.12 (31 Aug 2007 06:39:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2007 06:39:29 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Aug 31 08:39:28 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1IR0A3-0003JO-NX for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 31 Aug 2007 08:39:19 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IR0A3-00051N-A1 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 31 Aug 2007 02:39:19 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IR0A0-000515-5P for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 31 Aug 2007 02:39:16 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IR09x-00050s-Iz for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 31 Aug 2007 02:39:14 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IR09x-00050p-FW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 31 Aug 2007 02:39:13 -0400 Original-Received: from tomts13.bellnexxia.net ([209.226.175.34] helo=tomts13-srv.bellnexxia.net) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IR09u-0000rv-Gi; Fri, 31 Aug 2007 02:39:10 -0400 Original-Received: from ceviche.home ([70.55.80.183]) by tomts13-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.13 201-253-122-130-113-20050324) with ESMTP id <20070831063909.XFON13659.tomts13-srv.bellnexxia.net@ceviche.home>; Fri, 31 Aug 2007 02:39:09 -0400 Original-Received: by ceviche.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 1D189B4623; Fri, 31 Aug 2007 02:39:08 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Thu\, 30 Aug 2007 16\:50\:22 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1.50 (gnu/linux) X-Detected-Kernel: Solaris 8 (1) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:77455 Archived-At: > I think this change is a mistake: > +** Emacsclient has been extended to support opening a new terminal > +frame. Its behavior has been changed to open a new Emacs frame by > +default. Use the -c option to get the old behavior of opening files in > +the currently selected Emacs frame. > For people that normally don't make new frames, this will be a hassle. Agreed. It may also be a hassle for people who use multiple frames because IIUC it will create only one frame per emacsclient rather than one per file, like I use. > So I think it should depend on the value of `pop-up-frames'. I disagree. It should just revert to the old behavior (i.e. revert the "-c" arg to emacsclient). > Are there any arguments against testing `pop-up-frames'? If I understand the code correctly, the choice is made in emacsclient, so it does not have access to `pop-up-frames' anyway. Stefan