GNU bug report logs - #400
23.0.60; C-h v should pick up lispified name in Customize

Previous Next

Full log

Message #96 received at 400 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: larsi <at> gnus.org, 400 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, drew.adams <at> oracle.com
Subject: Re: bug#400: 23.0.60; C-h v should pick up lispified name in Customize
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2021 10:50:34 -0700

Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:

> Yes, because the actual customization happens in the variable's
> buffer.  So why is that a problem, again?

No, you can customize it directly from `customize-group'.

>> But users might still want an easy way to get the variable into the help
>> buffer.
>
> They have RET and mouse-1 click, don't they?  Isn't that enough?

Where in the customize buffer do I click or type RET to get
`describe-variable'?

> I say we have enough features to allow anyone to do what they want,
> and I see no reason to complicate commands for the marginal gains (if
> at all) that you describe.

Well, it's a quality of life feature, so of course I'm okay without it.

But I'm not sure what you mean by "complicating commands" given that the
proposal AFAIU is to introduce a specific `customize-describe-variable'
bound to `C-h v' that handles also the unlispified names.

> (Shouldn't there be some kind of "statute of limitations" on bugs that
> were filed too long ago, and have not gathered enough consensus for
> all that time?)

I believe the activity we are engaged in right now is currently as good
as it gets.  FWIW, if I had my way, I would for sure close bugs and
feature requests far more enthusiastically than is being done now.

For example, "wontfix" could also be used meaning: "yes, it's an issue
but it's not one we consider worth fixing, if you care enough send a
patch and we will reconsider".

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.