From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nicolas Goaziou Subject: Re: [POLL] Should Org tempo be enabled by default? (expand templates thru e.g. " References: <87lgd671k7.fsf@bzg.fr> <87o9i2p9qq.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87k1sq6znz.fsf@bzg.fr> <871seyp6fr.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <874lju6tap.fsf@bzg.fr> <87bme1y7ft.fsf@gmail.com> <87sh7d1upr.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:52389) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fD63s-0002ST-RI for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Apr 2018 06:29:37 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fD63s-0002Fa-0n for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Apr 2018 06:29:36 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87sh7d1upr.fsf@gnu.org> (Bastien's message of "Mon, 30 Apr 2018 01:03:28 +0200") List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" To: Bastien Cc: Tim Cross , emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Hello, Bastien writes: > Here is what the experience can look like: > > - Upgrading Emacs or Org (hurray!!) > - Trying to hit - Thinking your stupid [...] I have an issue with this argument: it can be opposed to virtually any backward-incompatible change we make. There are actually 10 such changes in Org 9.2. Would it makes sense to remove them because some users, unfortunately, will encounter a workflow break upon updating Org? I totally agree this is an issue, yet, we have to move forward. We can make UX consistent across releases, but we cannot guarantee 100% compatibility at each step. As a data point, I don't know any software that preserves the exact same UX after each release -- Firefox, Gnome, I'm looking at you! There are unavoidable gotchas. This just means Org is still vivid. > In fact, I'm inclined to ask the real question: if org-tempo is on by > default, who will have good reasons to turn it off and why? This is one problem: only a few will have a reason (good or bad, who cares?) to turn it off, e.g., because expansion gets in the way with other templating systems. Possibly even fewer will actually turn it off. As a consequence, the vast majority of users will keep using "