Re: [External] : Re: not good proposal: "C-z <letter>" reserved for users

[Robert Thorpe]

Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com> writes:

> I agree that there are nuances, and that adding a key to an already
> bound prefix key is less aggressive than binding a top-level key by
> default.
>
> Good point.  But let's at least start with a first-level
> approximation.  The problem is not so much the kind of thing you
> describe there.  The problem is things like Emacs suddenly deciding to
> bind `C-x p', `C-x x', `C-x /' etc. by default.
>
> Details about possibly binding _any_ more keys by default should be
> discussed generally, widely.  That's not been done.  A general
> convention that Emacs should not do this is in order, IMHO.  And I
> made clear that exceptions can always be handled by good, general
> discussion followed by maintainer decision.
>
> It's not black & white.  There is a serious problem, and I think there
> we should establish a general convention/rule/guideline/understanding
> that Emacs should keep its mitts off keys not already bound.

I see your points and I mostly agree.  I definitely agree that there
should be wider discussion before binding more keys by default.

But I still think it would be useful to have one key that is gauranteed
as Gregory Heyting suggests.  Even if it were only gauranteed for a few
years.

Preferably, we should have both...  Firstly, a general consensus to
discuss new keybindings and not to introduce lots of them at once.
Secondly, a single prefix-key specifically reserved for third-party
packages.

Also, there's still the issue of beginners.  I still think that asking
people to map keys themselves is unfriendly to new users.

BR,
Robert Thorpe