From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: Re: guix.el: Key bindings for a "package list" Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2014 10:26:09 +0200 Message-ID: <87egvq1nj2.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87a96e7bu3.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:40754) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XPoqc-0007ZI-7q for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 05 Sep 2014 04:26:31 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XPoqS-0007ZJ-F1 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 05 Sep 2014 04:26:22 -0400 Received: from hera.aquilenet.fr ([2a01:474::1]:59469) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XPoqS-0007Z7-8e for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 05 Sep 2014 04:26:12 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87a96e7bu3.fsf@gmail.com> (Alex Kost's message of "Fri, 05 Sep 2014 11:42:12 +0400") List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Alex Kost Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Hi! Alex Kost skribis: > Hello, > > I would like to know people's opinions about default key bindings. > > Currently in a buffer with a list of packages we have: "u"/"U" to > unmark/unmark all. But it leaves no room for marking for upgrade and I > just bound it to "^" which is not very good. > > So what about combining "unmark"/"unmark all" into one key and use > either: > > 1. "U" - unmark ("C-u U" - unmark all); > "u" - mark for upgrading. > > 2. "u" - unmark ("C-u u" - unmark all); > "U" - mark for upgrade. Should it also require (for consistency) to > use upper-case "I"/"D" for marking for installing/deletion? I=E2=80=99m hesitant, but I would vote for #2. I don=E2=80=99t think I and= D are needed though. > Also should there be a command to mark all obsolete packages for > upgrading? If so, what key should it be bound to? (perhaps my favourite > "^"). Actually this is what U does in package.el. But I=E2=80=99m fine with ^ he= re. Thanks, Ludo=E2=80=99.