Re: [POLL] Should Org tempo be enabled by default? (expand templates thru e.g. "<s[TAB]")

[Kevin Foley <kfoley15@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3380 bytes --]

Bastien <bzg@gnu.org> writes:

> Here is what the experience can look like:
>
> - Upgrading Emacs or Org (hurray!!)
> - Trying to hit <s as usual one month after the upgrade
> - Thinking your stupid

[...]

I have to admit that Bastien's list describes my experience almost
perfectly.  It look me a long time to figure out something that in the end
seemed very simple.  At the time I wasn't familiar with the NEWS file and
it didn't come up in any of my online searches.  It also didn't help that
site still documented the old behavior (and apparently still does
https://orgmode.org/manual/Easy-templates.html).

After reading Nicolas' points, I see the argument for moving people away
from org-tempo, actually I'm very excited to start using yasnippet. I've
been putting off incorporating it into my workflow for a while but this
thread has finally convinced me to start.

However, I do think the transition could be made a lot smoother for new
users.  The biggest step would be updating the easy-templates page to let
users know they now need to use org-tempo and should consider alternatives
such as yasnippet for more functionality.

Regards,
Kevin

On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 6:29 AM Nicolas Goaziou <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
wrote:

> Hello,
>
> Bastien <bzg@gnu.org> writes:
>
> > Here is what the experience can look like:
> >
> > - Upgrading Emacs or Org (hurray!!)
> > - Trying to hit <s as usual one month after the upgrade
> > - 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 "<s" -- and
> put maintenance burden on us -- instead of trying, and improving
> something else. Inertia...
>
> I already stated the following, sorry for re-iterating. Marking a region
> and wrapping it in some environment is a basic operation Org is expected
> to provide. We already did with `org-emphasize'. Implementing
> programmable templates, even though we are re-using what Emacs ships
> with, is another story.
>
> Org Tempo is a nice tool. I'm not questioning this. It is also almost
> 100% compatible with previous feature. Yet, it competes with external
> Emacs libraries, as capable as itself. Since it is not a feature
> mandatory in Org, why forcing it onto the users? I'm inclined to think
> we shouldn't.
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Nicolas Goaziou                                                0x80A93738
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 13893 bytes --]