From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:1008:1e59::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms8.migadu.com with LMTPS id cGzbKW0MoGXGbQAAkFu2QA (envelope-from ) for ; Thu, 11 Jan 2024 16:42:37 +0100 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:303:e224::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp1.migadu.com with LMTPS id KKNUJm0MoGUrTQEA62LTzQ (envelope-from ) for ; Thu, 11 Jan 2024 16:42:37 +0100 X-Envelope-To: larch@yhetil.org Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=posteo.net header.s=2017 header.b=AvNwaaHf; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=posteo.net; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1704987757; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=AO6BXoNkbPKpVBoJVo36c0P9Exq+do9pFWW3sCF92r4=; b=NejW/x/PfhAtb7I8SU02TWvUtdiLGudw+4c19V9loJGEi9eJmeLd9nSyRGkzVnt4+Ugtle /I+J7zCfnFC8/gd8H36VVqwUAMEsycmh6ThZwGVM5jATiZLvQa9Z0ShJE0qw3MQawfcEUa 9ALohOQWLP9hPIWtTDxnQmZnnDCxpuYfucVdeFurm4ORs8+ZU/zomPSXsN8sMIGG4jUuyk 9/xEpV/yLolqQ67ISu5uDzNiAUd6lGDp1nr/8XS7nUIyMlHUBHFeOCgZh49s3GczKE2rqN PC8opIUcEfbrAyvqXVVZ/9xLMkSivvMwMb7dy3GGhkYLQdw9og1lvWvq4JhAcA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=posteo.net header.s=2017 header.b=AvNwaaHf; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=posteo.net; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1704987757; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=Vl0VZePKTUj2kPY5vZ93DyDl6c45s1I+MwaB0ZQ37L06Bsvw0ESQz9bVViAe+UTv/pyG1K R6p7HoaM3zchXj2IapsElezdLmOyH3J3vVbkd4/Y3RidZlKzsfXTK+DTlpiZ6bMGRdvf/o DYt1xAjycmy3t0SPufpuE4v8VkVJZWXzvpodbnum3sEyDEujSMi4h/XIbFkrpEM84gESlf SOuXuRfVJp9EhMyL7Myr9TNZRvj2XakiXZv2Hc9Vmo9OqjHbmX+0cUf3yKMPcXC/MDM30d 4RcepgEUETCgy69p7tp543cxZQsd3aV41o1jIrLFSErC2Zf9F2PLuq23T4G7Xw== Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 64C1212B09 for ; Thu, 11 Jan 2024 16:42:37 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rNxBO-0005GC-5t; Thu, 11 Jan 2024 10:41:26 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rNxBM-0005FY-BC for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 11 Jan 2024 10:41:24 -0500 Received: from mout01.posteo.de ([185.67.36.65]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rNxBK-0005y5-1N for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 11 Jan 2024 10:41:24 -0500 Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5D69B24002A for ; Thu, 11 Jan 2024 16:41:19 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1704987679; bh=JqgIoFx+kgDSyPR0xevPd4K7yAZAwlBrvTn7xgbyRXM=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:From; b=AvNwaaHfJegCNRlMKXORt7+yrs8FfEGoI7gT3Nf45ZCm04bzb/RCqUhVjkuUGxKaG x0+6KWj7hKDAYUBUiYk2SFw0m3286ciJmrq4/f+l31mubUkMlPrv7kPzdNYy38kcZl hV7a2RBvz9sLBsFgZjd4hb89DTGNzllePyyPTQM1qbFQH0GNUQ7EuAs7WbEdu++30W FB8+kF3knMZtY4lQWWtXlBJZqatYzDoiaQII0H+Lnjddty9Pzr5HI8APdoF1hVhitv HTku5nZE279pLxkxmfAab/z436zFWu8SXAIDd+B49rEUVGhyvyKhjKd3uEG4EON6II Jom9VsxbxzihA== Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4T9pmZ42D3z6txQ; Thu, 11 Jan 2024 16:41:17 +0100 (CET) From: Ihor Radchenko To: Stefan Monnier Cc: Eli Zaretskii , emacs-orgmode@gnu.org, 65734@debbugs.gnu.org, manikulin@gmail.com, iota@whxvd.name Subject: Re: bug#65734: [BUG] kill-whole-line on folded subtrees [9.6.8 (release_9.6.8-3-g21171d @ /home/w/usr/emacs/0/29/0/lisp/org/)] In-Reply-To: References: <87il8pao4l.fsf@whxvd.name> <87tts8vrpb.fsf@localhost> <83cyyw4of7.fsf@gnu.org> <875y4ovct9.fsf@localhost> <875y04yq9s.fsf@localhost> <875y02y0da.fsf@localhost> <87frz6w2zt.fsf@localhost> <83cyu9nyea.fsf@gnu.org> <87sf35pcds.fsf@localhost> Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2024 15:44:29 +0000 Message-ID: <87wmsfj2n6.fsf@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.67.36.65; envelope-from=yantar92@posteo.net; helo=mout01.posteo.de X-Spam_score_int: -43 X-Spam_score: -4.4 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Country: US X-Migadu-Scanner: mx12.migadu.com X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 64C1212B09 X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -9.47 X-Spam-Score: -9.47 X-TUID: MZ9dxE2pxd6f Stefan Monnier writes: >>> I said that remapping widely-used keys to commands that behave >>> significantly differently places a non-trivial burden on users, >>> especially on those who use the remapping mode relatively rarely. >> >> Sure. From which I concluded that Org mode should avoid remapping > > I don't think that's what it means. It means that it depends on what is > the end-user-visible effect. If the remapped version of the command > "does the same" conceptually, then it's OK (even more so if the > non-remapped version of the command ends up misbehaving). Ok. I stand corrected. > I think the main question is: can we expect that some users out there > will want to use the non-remapped version of the command because they > prefer its behavior? We received no bug reports complaining about non-standard behaviour of remapped functions AFAIK. So, I do not think that Org mode has problems here. -- Ihor Radchenko // yantar92, Org mode contributor, Learn more about Org mode at . Support Org development at , or support my work at