Carsten Dominik <dominik@uva.nl> writes:

> I have always come down on the side of NOT breaking backward
> compatibility unless we really HAVE TO in order to make progress. The
> reason for this bias is because most Org users are not reading this
> maling list and just want the system to function and to continue to
> function the way they are used to, while it is hopefully improving. It
> will stop them from upgrading if such breakage happens too often.
>
> So I would support reimplement the expansion (including
> org-try-structure-completion for people who use that in custom code),
> if possible of course on the back of one of the built-in expansion
> systems in Emacs, before pushing this change out in a release. I would
> certainly reimplement this in some way for myself, because using these
> abbreviations is already hardcoded in my spine, I think.

I agree. I support removing redundant code behind the scenes, but I also
think we should preserve backwards compatibility in the user interface.
A fair number of people around here have been using Org Mode for more
than a decade, and, for better or for worse, everything about the user
interface is now hardwired in their brains.

In short, we have a time-saving expansion system that works well for
lots of people. I support re-implementing it on top of another snippet
engine but also leaving it in place until a suitable replacement is
ready.

Matt