[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Imports / inclusion of s.el into Emacs

From: Dmitry Gutov
Subject: Re: Imports / inclusion of s.el into Emacs
Date: Mon, 4 May 2020 21:44:58 +0300
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0

On 04.05.2020 21:11, Eli Zaretskii wrote:

Of many discussion about changing default behavior that I've seen, the
vast majority have failed.

Then you only remember the ones that led to nothing because we didn't
do anything but talk.

Others, where some change did arrive, contained a lot of talk as well.

A recent example: the :extend
face attribute.

It's an interesting counter-example. First, it did little to change the
actual functionality, just the looks.

The reaction to this "little change" could have fooled me.

In your opinion at the time it was little, IIRC. One of the reasons it got in, I guess.

Second, there were no noticeable consensus, inside or outside the
core, that the new behavior is better

Not true.  There was complete consensus among those who discussed the
feature before it went into implementation.

Among the 2-3 people who participated in the highly technical bug-report/discussion about the display engine? Please be serious. That doesn't reflect the opinions even across emacs-devel, much less the community at large.

And once we found out the backward compatibility problem, and all the associated details, there was still one solution available: revert. That's what we usually do when we don't manage to fix a regression before a release, don't we?

(I've mostly seen dissenting feedback, but the split is probably more
like 50/50). But apparently you liked it well enough because it made
Emacs's behavior more compatible with other software _you_ were familiar
with, that even breaking the expectations of a lot of our users, or
having to force all theme authors to update their themes (until I came
along with a fix) wasn't price too high.

So what is the lesson you suggest to take out of this example, in the
context of "adapting"?

Maybe that backward compatibility is not as important as some people like to claim? Other lessons would be less kind to type out.

In any case, I don't see that particular change affecting the experience of new Emacs users much one way or another (as long as all the themes work). Thus it's not a great example of Emacs "adapting" to contemporary user expectations.

reply via email to

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