Re: emacs 22 - regular-expression isearch on spaces extremely lenient

[David Kastrup]

dkcombs@panix.com (David Combs) writes:

> So how did this thing get included?
>
> Are we all subject to whatever whim that occurs to the devel-people?

And gets accepted by a majority of them.  You can easily join the
development list and discuss things as well if you want to: it does
not require you becoming a developer.

> Does (gnu)=Emacs *belong* to just them -- such that whatever *they*
> vote for becomes "law"?

You can be one of "them" if you want to.  And yes, the directions that
Emacs takes are solely determined by those who communicate with the
developers.  How could it be otherwise?

> How many thousands, or tens (hundreds?) of thousands of people daily
> use emacs, in fact *rely* on emacs for their most important work?

Well, tough.  If they decide not to participate in the discussions
about what to do and what not, they have to take what is getting
handed down to them.  If they are afraid of what this could be, they
can just stay with their favorite old version.

> Now, maybe it's infeasible to try to get a vote from that
> world-user-base; but heck, aren't there a lot of people who read
> this newsgroup at least once a week?
>
> Why not set up a vote among all of *us* (yes, include the
> devel-people too)?

Because then the devel-people would be in a minority.  They are those
with a clue about the internals of Emacs, and they are those who will
have to implement whatever changes are made to Emacs.  Nobody pays
them a dime (at least most of them).  So why should they let others,
who are too lazy to get themselves with the development process at
all, dictate what direction they are going to take Emacs to?

Yes, Emacs goes where those developing it take it.  There is no other
way.  Read the developer lists for a while and voice your opinion
whenever you think your opinion important.

> (To help avoidng vote-fraud, we could limit it to those who have
> posted within, say, the last year or two -- and we'd suspect
> funny-tricks if any voter appeared twice.)
>
> We really have to have some final hurdle that any controversial
> feature must pass before it gets included -- *especially* when it's
> not being defaulted "off".

Who is this "we" you are talking of?

> I've been using emacs for *so* long (since 1980 with twenex-emacs,
> rms on gnu jumping over the moon), even if not so expertly, that
> this (by now) old dog's paws have a really hard time switching now
> hard-wired habits and expectations.
>
> Seems like as good a time as any to set up a better
> procedure for (thus far) few "controversial" changes.
>
> Just my two bits -- but I hope I'm not the only one
> who feels like I do.

You are free to join the discussions among the developers.  It does
not get better than that.  Because ultimately the developers take
Emacs where they decide they want it to go.  Feel free to stay with an
old version, or to switch to a different editor.  But I doubt you'll
find that the development situation with a different editor will
provide more opportunity for making yourself heard.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum