> Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2022 20:25:12 +0000 > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > From: Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> > > > > > The node you added is very short, barely a dozen lines. It makes > > > > little sense to have it separate from where edebug-save-windows is > > > > described. So I think you should move it there. The location of the > > > > node inside the manual's hierarchy is much less important than to have > > > > the information pertaining to edebug-save-windows in a single place, > > > > because no one reads the ELisp reference manual in its entirety. The > > > > only thing we need to facilitate people finding this place is add good > > > > index entries there. > > > > So you're proposing leaving the "The outside context" node incomplete, > > > according to its clearly defined purpose, and therefore wrong? Why? > > > If you want, you can add a short sentence there about the issue, with > > a cross-reference to where the issue is described in full. > > "There"? There is no suitable place to put such a link, other than my > new node. Such a strategy would unbalance "The Outside Context" by > having most of its contents in subsubsections, and the bit about point > corruption at the other end of a link, in some random page. > > As a matter of interest, one of the other nodes under "The Outside > Context", namely "Checking Whether to Stop" has just 13 lines. > > > This is how we organize our manuals: when some topic could be relevant > > to more than one situation, we describe it in full in one place, and > > have short references in all the others. > > We should describe it in the PRIMARY relevant place. > > > > Remember, this patch is not about edebug-save-windows. It's about point > > > getting corrupted. > > > The index entries and the cross-references should solve this. And the > > issue _is_ related to edebug-save-windows .... > > It is only tangentially related to edebug-save-windows. It is about > point getting corrupted. An angry victim of this bug should be be able > to find the description by searching for "corrupt". > > > .... and to the other similar option described in the same node. So > > having all of this info there makes the description more > > comprehensive. > > Yes, stuff about options belongs in the "Options" page. Stuff about > point getting corrupted does not, except at the other end of a link. Instead of continuing this endless argument, I prefer to fix this myself, using your text where appropriate. Are you okay with that?
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4