On Fri, Jun 21 2013, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>> Change to kill-buffer allowed an advice to be replaced with a hook,
>
> OK
>
>> and after looking more closely at remember.el, I think notes might be
>> a good fit for it.
>
> Indeed.  Why even define a separate notes-file?

I wanted to keep it as an option for people who would like to use
remember to store data in notes file which then gets processed somehow
(I've never used remember before now, so I'm not sure what that could
involve) while use notes for some random data.  As far as *I'm*
concerned, I can leave w/o notes-file and just remember-data-file.

> And why not use (find-file-noselect notes-file), maybe followed by
> a rename-buffer?

I'll take a look at it.

>> Stefan, are you still not convinced, and prefer to have it in ELPA
>> after all?
>
> No, I think remember.el is a good place for it.  It would also be good
> to use the "remember-" prefix.

Will do.

>> The second patch is actually unrelated, but something I've noticed
>> while playing with notes.
>
> Good point.  I think we should turn get-file-buffer into an alias for
> find-buffer-visiting.

$ grep find-buffer-visiting $(grep -Rl get-file-buffer **/*.el) |wc -l
43

so it seems that in most cases code sticks to either of the two
functions, and some of the above occurrences are XEmacs compatibility
functions, comments, and situations where it would seem that the code
could be easily converted to stick to find-buffer-visiting.

So yeah, I guess it is doable.

-- 
Best regards,                                         _     _
.o. | Liege of Serenely Enlightened Majesty of      o' \,=./ `o
..o | Computer Science,  Michał “mina86” Nazarewicz    (o o)
ooo +----<email/xmpp: mpn@google.com>--------------ooO--(_)--Ooo--