Subject: bug#57412: Could we make linum.el obsolete?

From: Colin Baxter <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2022 21:17:47 +0100

>>>>> Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors <Stefan> writes:

    > Colin Baxter [2022-08-26 20:00:40] wrote:
    >> Yes, I understand that and agree. From my perspective, I am
    >> disappointed that candidates for obsolescence seem to be chosen
    >> from libraries that are useful and not from morse, zone and the
    >> like.

    > Those that are useful but suffer from corner-case problems due to
    > the underlying design are bound to fall into this trap: if they
    > weren't very useful, noone would bother to reimplement them to fix
    > those corner cases but since the problems stem from the underlying
    > approach, the fix requires a significant rewrite which inevitably
    > leads to a slightly different featureset.

    > The purpose of obsoleting a library like `nlinum.el` is to
    > help/encourage people to move to the better options out there (and
    > sometimes also to discover important use-cases not yet covered by
    > the new code).

    > The maintenance cost of `nlinum.el` isn't very high, but there's a
    > cost for users of having to choose between various options, none
    > of which is a strict superset of the other.

I am not convinced. However thank you nevertheless for taking the time
and effort to explain.

Best wishes,