From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Adam Porter Subject: Re: Defaults for noobs, dotfiles for vets [legibility 1/6] Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2020 09:25:05 -0600 Message-ID: <87mu9xgipa.fsf@alphapapa.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:46295) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1izMYL-0005oD-8F for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 05 Feb 2020 10:25:22 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1izMYK-0002gb-4r for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 05 Feb 2020 10:25:21 -0500 Received: from ciao.gmane.io ([159.69.161.202]:35636) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1izMYJ-0002Ut-Sm for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 05 Feb 2020 10:25:20 -0500 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.io with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1izMYH-0002yW-Q1 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 05 Feb 2020 16:25:17 +0100 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-mx.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Texas Cyberthal writes: > Making a vet change a default if he decides he doesn't like a change > upon upgrading won't drive him away, but Emacs' unfriendly defaults > are always driving away noobs. Therefore Org's defaults should be > noob-friendly, not vet-friendly. There is certainly room to improve some Emacs defaults; there are active threads on emacs-devel about it now. However, the question of to what degree Emacs should target certain types of users is a wider one, and answering it one way or the other doesn't necessarily support your proposed changes. > Probably vets should use legible settings as well. I became accustomed > to less-legible Org settings, and thought they were superior. But when > I cleaned up my Spacemacs config, I incidentally restored some default > legibility tweaks I'd disabled. After a brief exposure, I realized the > tweaks were superior, and that my preferences had been wrong. Changing > the defaults can overcome vet inertia and improve their UI. It's neither the spirit nor practice of Emacs to tell users what settings they should use. Emacs exists to empower users to meet their needs according to their preferences. It is not for you, nor us, to decide whether certain users are suffering from "inertia" which we ought to overcome on their behalf for the sake of improving their UI. That is for them to decide, not us. This is Emacs, not Apple, Inc. >> Terminals can display colors, underlines, italics, and bold text > > Proposed legibility changes don't affect those font aspects. I was responding to this claim of yours: >>> Concerns about terminal impact appear to be moot, since terminal >>> ignores most font settings. So your claim has been clarified from "terminals ignore most font settings" to "my proposed changes don't affect the font aspects that terminals display." Please quote enough of the message you're replying to so that the conversation can be easily followed (by me, if no one else).