Replace Org's C-TAB with C-M-TAB - objection?

Replace Org's C-TAB with C-M-TAB - objection?

[Bastien]

Hi all,

C-TAB in Org is bound to `org-force-cycle-archived' to allow to cycle
through archived subtrees.

In the Emacs tab-bar mode, it is now bound to `tab-next', which needs
to work globally.

So Org's binding and tab-bar's one are in conflict, as reported here:
https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=41325

I suggest binding `org-force-cycle-archived' to C-M-TAB: any objection?

Thanks,

-- 
 Bastien

Re: Replace Org's C-TAB with C-M-TAB - objection?

[stardiviner]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256


Bastien <bzg@gnu.org> writes:

> Hi all,
>
> C-TAB in Org is bound to `org-force-cycle-archived' to allow to cycle
> through archived subtrees.
>
> In the Emacs tab-bar mode, it is now bound to `tab-next', which needs
> to work globally.
>
> So Org's binding and tab-bar's one are in conflict, as reported here:
> https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=41325
>
> I suggest binding `org-force-cycle-archived' to C-M-TAB: any objection?
>
> Thanks,

I object this change. Emacs tab-bar is not enabled by default. When conflict,
user can customize keybinding. I don't think it's very necessary to change.

- -- 
[ stardiviner ]
       I try to make every word tell the meaning that I want to express.

       Blog: https://stardiviner.github.io/
       IRC(freenode): stardiviner, Matrix: stardiviner
       GPG: F09F650D7D674819892591401B5DF1C95AE89AC3
      
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQFIBAEBCAAyFiEE8J9lDX1nSBmJJZFAG13xyVromsMFAl7KVPcUHG51bWJjaGls
ZEBnbWFpbC5jb20ACgkQG13xyVromsNH7gf+NdaEwp1Up/jxbebM65JcBky/Cu6I
9rFQvFOzQ/dIQDb6IpMzOqJta8AwPIXL5tXebs4Af16D8kO5fL+q/noUoxBE7IUA
CQiGlAW3HAeIPFomnkLwSubctfbORJhwmVPoKoNkVoH98eTwuAXQVORzwDpaU7/2
NasQO6KJ1VJ48v8ipXamVO/KcDIYl4zRv5inXcpsigIpXMQ1tkeNAZUB6thaH1xz
3lDy5nSBozfrDZXq8maYV+Oa5cklR6OuNN+0VHk7HBci5vlKHAuMygLXL7M2ftIZ
HkOs56aSlKwql7BzNUnkJuGx5KQVizG6cQy9ide9rjWwf5iZPn6mR8jIbg==
=JWH3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: Replace Org's C-TAB with C-M-TAB - objection?

[Joost Kremers]

On Sun, May 24 2020, stardiviner wrote:
> Bastien <bzg@gnu.org> writes:
>> C-TAB in Org is bound to `org-force-cycle-archived' to allow to 
>> cycle
>> through archived subtrees.
>>
>> In the Emacs tab-bar mode, it is now bound to `tab-next', which 
>> needs
>> to work globally.
>>
>> So Org's binding and tab-bar's one are in conflict, as reported 
>> here:
>> https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=41325
>>
>> I suggest binding `org-force-cycle-archived' to C-M-TAB: any 
>> objection?
>>
>> Thanks,
>
> I object this change. Emacs tab-bar is not enabled by default. 
> When conflict,
> user can customize keybinding. I don't think it's very necessary 
> to change.

I would support the change, since both Org mode and tab-bar-mode 
are part of core Emacs and I doubt it'll be clear to new users 
coming to Emacs why these conflicting key bindings exist. Instead, 
they'll be annoyed that they cannot C-TAB out of the Org buffer 
and their impression of Emacs (not just Org mode or tab-bar-mode) 
will suffer. Ever more so because it's probably not immediately 
obvious to new users how C-TAB is different from just TAB: they 
both open the subtree at point.

I've been using C-TAB for a long time to switch buffers (albeit 
not with tab-bar-mode), and it's always annoying when some mode 
usurps (from my perspective) this keybinding. Now, I'm familiar 
with Emacs and the relative independence and freedom that 
individual packages have, plus C-TAB is a personal keybinding, so 
I know this sort of thing may happen and I know how to resolve it. 
For a new user, that won't be so obvious. For them, this will 
simply look like a badly designed UI.

So I think the general argument for habit-breaking UI changes 
applies: it creates a more consistent UI, which means it's easier 
on new users and more in line with what they expect. For existing 
users that want the old behaviour back, it's a simple 
configuration in their init.el.

-- 
Joost Kremers
Life has its moments

Bind `org-force-cycle-archived' to C-c C-TAB instead of C-TAB

[Bastien]

Hi all,

Bastien <bzg@gnu.org> writes:

> C-TAB in Org is bound to `org-force-cycle-archived' to allow to cycle
> through archived subtrees.
>
> In the Emacs tab-bar mode, it is now bound to `tab-next', which needs
> to work globally.
>
> So Org's binding and tab-bar's one are in conflict, as reported here:
> https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=41325
>
> I suggest binding `org-force-cycle-archived' to C-M-TAB: any objection?

I've finally used C-c C-TAB for `org-force-cycle-archived'.

It seems easy to remember for those used to C-TAB and it does not
other Emacs or system keybindings AFAIK.

The change will be released in Org 9.4.

-- 
 Bastien

Re: Replace Org's C-TAB with C-M-TAB - objection?

[Bastien]

Hi all,

Bastien <bzg@gnu.org> writes:

> C-TAB in Org is bound to `org-force-cycle-archived' to allow to cycle
> through archived subtrees.
>
> In the Emacs tab-bar mode, it is now bound to `tab-next', which needs
> to work globally.
>
> So Org's binding and tab-bar's one are in conflict, as reported here:
> https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=41325
>
> I suggest binding `org-force-cycle-archived' to C-M-TAB: any objection?

I've finally used C-c C-TAB for `org-force-cycle-archived'.

It seems easy to remember for those used to C-TAB and it does not
conflict with other Emacs or OS keybindings AFAIK.

The change will be released in Org 9.4.

-- 
 Bastien