Subject: bug#78124: 30.1; `revert-buffer' regression

From: Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2025 21:29:21 +0300

> From: Drew Adams <[email-masked]>
> CC: "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>,
>         Kévin Le Gouguec <[email-masked]>
> Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2025 16:58:05 +0000
> 
> What's so special about the buffer writability state that it needs
> to be preserved, rather than reflecting the file's writability
> state?

The general agreement was that it is a better default.

> "Each of these functions are called" -> "is", not "are".
> "Each" is singular.
> 
> "return a lambda" and "these lambdas will be called":
> not conventional for our docs (or for other Lisp docs).
> "Lambda expression", "lambda form", or "anonymous
> function" is better.  The Elisp manual uses those terms.
> (Same problem in Elisp node `Reverting'.)
> 
> "called one by one in the order of the list": just say
> they're called in order; the order is obvious.  (And
> the manual doesn't even bother to mention the order.)

Thanks, I made these changes.