[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Changed outside --> set, in Customize UI

From: Drew Adams
Subject: RE: Changed outside --> set, in Customize UI
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 12:37:45 -0800

       How about an argument justifying the distinction, to stave off
       Occam and his nasty razor?

    I gave several arguments.

I meant arguments about the desirability in the UI of "outside" + "inside"
vs just changed". I haven't seen those arguments.

I saw problems pointed out that already exist today. They cannot, therefore,
be related to the proposed UI change, unless the problems are seen to be
exacerbated by the UI change. You did argue that the current warning serves
to protect from the pbs, which is a valid point (that I disagree with).

       so, yes, the bugs need to be fixed.

    But we can not hurry and try to fix all of them for 22, because
    that would nearly guarantee that we would be introducing more
    bugs than we would fix.

Agree 100%. And the proposed UI change "changed outside" -> "set" wouldn't
be for 22.1 either.

       At a minimum, this preference could, well, itself be treated as a
       user preference, that is, a user option.

    I do not believe that it would make sense to introduce an option for
    one single release (or *maybe* two should 23 be released very soon
    after 22).

Do you mean that if all the bugs are fixed you will no longer prefer
"outside" + "inside", that you will prefer just "changed" (set)? If so, then
there is no need (for you) for a user preference here. If not, then why
would this be limited to 1-2 releases?

    After we change the Custom interface to get rid of the various bugs I
    described, the user will probably not be able any more to even _try_
    to undo an `add-hook' in his .emacs through Custom (which would not
    work anyway).  He would see the added hook in the Custom buffer but it
    would appear as being "untouchable".  He would have to remove the
    `add-hook' from his .emacs.  That is the only way that works anyway.
    The _illusion_ of being able to do it from the Custom buffer would no
    longer be there.

Good (IIUC).

    ..._Not_ for 22, however.  *Much* too late in the game.

Agreed 100%.

We really need to devote some time to discussing possible changes in depth.
Customize has great potential, but it needs some work, too. It would be good
to get solid agreement (consensus) on what we want to do wrt the user
interface and wrt the implementation. Also, Per is a key player in the
Customize design and implementation, and he has no time to participate in
discussion now. Besides perhaps fixing some of the bugs, there is no reason
to hurry any changes to Customize; it's better to take our time and get it

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]