Re: Changes for emacs 28

[João Távora]

Boruch Baum <boruch_baum@gmx.com> writes:

> On Tue, 08 Sep 2020 12:13:04 +0100, João Távora wrote:
>> Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:
>> > I like the idea, but this should be something to set in .emacs,
>> > not a command-line option.
>>
>> It must be a command-line option because when reproducing and fixing
>> bugs on Emacs, you very frequently have the need to run "a bare Emacs
>> -Q" frequently from a shell, devoid of any third-party packages that may
>> be interfering.
>
> That's only ever is true when reporting a bug to the emacs project
> itself.

No, no and no.  When answering bug reports for a package that is _not_
in Emacs it's imperative that the reporter uses Emacs -Q + <package
setup> when explaining the problem.

I really feel I must stress this, since I've come across so many bad
frustrating and time-consuming bug reports in this aspect in last 15
years (Yasnippet, SLY, Eglot, many others).  The frustration is not only
mine, it's also the reporter's, who frequently isn't even aware of the
underlying Emacs they they are using inside Doom, or even that there is
variation of it that is not souped up with a million packages.

Unless explicited otherwise, authors develop packages to work with
Emacs, not with other packages they are not aware of.  Personally, I
will go to some effort (but not an infinite amount) to help the user
track down the problem even in tandem with other packages not in Emacs.
But the initial report really must contain the perfectly reproducible
starting conditions.  Emacs -Q is an invaluable tool for that.  Every
user must never be made to forget it, no matter what Doom, Space, or
Cauliflower distribution they use.

João