Subject: Re: bug#62720: 29.0.60; Not easy at all to upgrade :core packages like Eglot

From: Dmitry Gutov <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2023 02:51:19 +0300

On 27/04/2023 13:44, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2023 12:00:51 +0300
>> Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked],
>>   [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
>> From: Dmitry Gutov <[email-masked]>
>>
>>> And what about the renaming you suggested in another bug report?
>>
>> Still waiting for your go-ahead. Although it sounds like I have it.
> 
> No one objected, AFAIU.  So I think you can install that.

Thank you, done.

>>> As for PROBLEMS, I'm not sure.  We usually put there only something
>>> that people actually complain about, not proactively.  How about
>>> mentioning this in the doc string instead?
>>
>> Sure. Hopefully it won't create an impression that the described
>> behavior is _intended_.
> 
> We can say something like "Currently, ..." to make that clear.

Very good, I've used that and an additional clarification for a 
recommended alternative. Please see how you like it, or whether it needs 
improving.

Before the next pretest is cut, I'd also like to bring up the question 
again of backporting the patch for bug#62816 (with Joao's support: 
previously mentioned in 
https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=62720#517, for example).

It improves the part of Eldoc that is not used by default 
(eldoc-documentation-strategy has a different value) but which is used 
by Eglot since it changes that variable in its managed buffers.