Re: Changes for emacs 28

[Ergus]

On Mon, Sep 07, 2020 at 09:58:32AM -0400, Yoni Rabkin wrote:
> Ergus <spacibba@aol.com> writes:
>
> > I am NOT telling we should do all this, but this is what a young user
> > expects because all these is more or less standard everywhere else.
>
> I appreciate you enthusiasm for making Emacs popular. Thank you for
> that.
>
> However, it is always jarring to me to see free software developers
> arguing over features none of them like or want, and instead trying to
> "prove" to the other that a hypothetical third person would really like
> those features. This supposed "young user" is a pretend person; they
> don't exist. People ascribe whatever properties they want to the poor
> hypothetical "young user" and then argue that those properties require a
> change in Emacs. I disagree with this approach because I think that real
> people and their preferences are more complicated and subtle than any
> person we can make up as a tool to back an argument.
The post actually started not for adding new features, but just to
change some of our defaults. Actually one thing I don't like about doom
or spacemacs is the excessive complexity they add and long configuration
sets.

When I recommend Emacs to any of my students; after a week trying it
they finally go for VSCode or sublime and they get the work done in an
hour.

Actually I have this config I share with them with only vanilla features:

https://github.com/Ergus/mini_dotemacs

And so far I could convince at least some of them this year.

> If you want these features yourself then you should add them (I don't
> mean that in a sarcastic way at all). Your enthusiasm for creating and
> maintaining these features will appeal to others who want similar
> features. We all know and love this way of development in the free
> software development world. This way assures that at least one real
> person's needs are being met.
Again, are not features the "issue", but some "bad" defaults. If there
come out specific features I will try (as I am doing actually with
vertical-icomplete or highlight-completions).

The question to the developers was about defaults we would be willing to
change and which are whiten in stone.

> If you don't want these features yourself and nobody else in the project
> wants them either, the only way I can think of making a compelling
> argument for people to develop those feature is to ask real people and
> get real responses. I am fairly confident that if you had a testimony or
> user-test from actual people stating that a feature is missing, then
> people here would help develop that feature.
Actually as mentioned before, the existence of doom emacs, spacemacs and
all the other configs (some of them more popular than vanilla these
days) is a proof.

> I develop Emacs extensions (Emms, rt-liberation in GNU ELPA, and others
> outside of it). I never try to guess what a hypothetical person wants
> from Emms, but I do actively solicit requests and suggestions from
> anyone I can, and when someone cares enough to ask for a feature, I do
> everything I can to add it. Indeed, Emms has several extensions and
> modes that I never use and can't even wrap my head around why people
> like. But real people asked for them, so they are there.
I am adding changes to completions and icomplete while I use ivy.

> --
>   "Cut your own wood and it will warm you twice"