Send Ebib-users mailing list submissions to
[email protected]
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ebib-users
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can reach the person managing the list at
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Ebib-users digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Fwd: Ebib 0.25 released! (Jesse Alama)
2. Re: Ebib 0.25 released! (Steve Youngs)
3. Re: Fwd: Ebib 0.25 released! (Steve Youngs)
4. Re: Ebib 0.25 released! (Joost Kremers)
5. Re: Ebib 0.25 released! (Steve Youngs)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2006 12:41:23 -0700
From: "Jesse Alama" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [Ebib-users] Fwd: Ebib 0.25 released!
To: [email protected]
Message-ID:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Sorry, I meant to send this to the list, not just to Steve:
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Jesse Alama <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Aug 19, 2006 12:40 PM
Subject: Re: Ebib 0.25 released!
To: Steve Youngs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Steve Youngs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> * Joost Kremers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Note that the key definitions are now all in .ebibrc. That means
> > that if you install the new version, you must also copy the new
> > ebibrc to your HOME dir (or at least copy the key definitions to
> > your existing .ebibrc), otherwise no command keys will be defined.
>
> Wow, this is an incredibly _bad_ idea. Why are you leaving the
> responsibility of default key bindings up to the user?
>
> What happens to the poor user that downloads the Ebib dist tarball,
> installs, and then deletes the tarball. Then one day, disaster strikes
> and he blows away his ${HOME}[1]...
I'm afraid I may have asked Joost to pursue a red herring: he's
responding to me complaining about non-configurable keys. I had in
mind some way of customizing keys different from the usual way of
hacking one's emac configuration file, but I didn't specify what I had
in mind to Joost, and actually I'm not even sure what I meant.
I do agree, though, that leaving the default keybindings up to the
user is a peculiar move.
I'm not sure I see the point of your comment about wiping out your
home directory. If one does that, one has got more problems than
simply no longer having one's ebib key configuration...
> I also don't see any benefit or point to the `ebib-key' macro.
> Isn't...
>
> (define-key ebib-foo-map [(control c) x] #'foo-function)
>
> ...good enough?
I think that may be right, for now.
> > Jesse made a few other suggestions, that I'm considering
> > incorporating. One thing I think I won't do, is to use Emacs'
> > standard customisation interface (M-x customize) for Ebib.
>
> I'm not sure how much of Ebib is customisable, but I think this is a mistake.
Huh?
> > Personally, I don't really like this interface,
>
> Neither do I.
I don't like it much, either, but I do use it a lot. Moreover:
> > and the elisp code it generates is so cluttered that it can hardly be
> > modified by hand.
>
> The type of user that relies on `M-x customize' is most likely _not_
> the type of user to look at, or want to modify what it generates. :-)
I wouldn't say that I rely on Custom, but I certainly use it as often
as I can. Please don't ignore users like me!
> > Plus, I feel that the little customisation that Ebib might need
> > can easily be handled through .ebibrc.
>
> OK, I'm heading off on a bit of a tangent here, but, from what I can
> see, there isn't anything in .ebibrc that couldn't be left in
> ebib.el. I don't see the need to have an rc file. Couldn't you just
> state in the manual... "if you want to add your own entry types, put
> (defentry foo-entry (...)) into your init.el/.emacs" ?
I think this is a good idea -- having that ebibrc file makes me
uncomfortable: the one included in the distribution specifies default
behavior, but if this file isn't included than the installation
breaks. This makes it somewhat annoying to package ebib for debian
and fink, since the package description somehow has to indicate to the
user that his installation is incomplete until he puts that ebibrc
file in his home directory. I think the contents ebibrc file should
be embedded in ebib.el, somehow, and ebib.el should be extended so
that it uses a configuration file, say, .ebibrc, ala .gnus (for
example). And one should be able to use Custom to specify the
location of that configuration file :->
> One last tangent before I finish... Why oh why isn't the manual in
> Texinfo format? From there you could generate your PDF and HTML,
> while the rest of us can read the Ebib manual inside our emacs in
> info. :-)
I agree that the documentation should be available within the Info
system. I've taken up the task of converting Joost's LaTeX
documentation to TeXinfo.
Jesse
--
Jesse Alama ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
--
Jesse Alama ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 13:07:05 +1000
From: Steve Youngs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [Ebib-users] Ebib 0.25 released!
To: Ebib Users <[email protected]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Keywords: user,m-x,ebib,defcustom,customize,emacs,use,through
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
* Joost Kremers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, Aug 19, 2006 at 05:08:46PM +1000, Steve Youngs wrote:
[key bindings]
>> In what way were they not customisable before?
> you needed to hack the source before.
No you didn't. You added some `define-key' forms to your init.el/.emacs.
> but someone that knows latex cannot be assumed to know elisp
Perhaps not, but I think the average LaTeX user, especially the
emacs-brandishing LaTeX user, wouldn't have too much of a problem.
>> I also don't see any benefit or point to the `ebib-key' macro.
>> Isn't...
>>
>> (define-key ebib-foo-map [(control c) x] #'foo-function)
>>
>> ...good enough?
> this and the other two macros are just to sugar-coat lisp syntax a bit for
> non-lispers.
:-)
>> > Jesse made a few other suggestions, that I'm considering
>> > incorporating. One thing I think I won't do, is to use Emacs'
>> > standard customisation interface (M-x customize) for Ebib.
>>
>> I'm not sure how much of Ebib is customisable, but I think this is a
mistake.
> what is? doing it through M-x customize or *not* doing it through M-x
> customize?
Not giving the user the ability to customise Ebib via M-x customize if
they so desire.
>> > Plus, I feel that the little customisation that Ebib might need
>> > can easily be handled through .ebibrc.
>>
>> OK, I'm heading off on a bit of a tangent here, but, from what I can
>> see, there isn't anything in .ebibrc that couldn't be left in
>> ebib.el. I don't see the need to have an rc file. Couldn't you just
>> state in the manual... "if you want to add your own entry types, put
>> (defentry foo-entry (...)) into your init.el/.emacs" ?
> well, that would be an option, but that would kinda defeat the
> purpose of using autoload.
How so? It shouldn't change things at all in that regard.
>> Actually, I'd be inclined to turn those `defentry's into
>> `defcustom's, although I'm not quite sure how hard that would
>> be. :-)
> but doesn't defcustom imply using M-x customize?
No, it just means the user can customise via M-x customize if she
wants to. Just because a variable is defined with `defcustom' doesn't
mean it can't be assigned in the user's .emacs with `setq'[1]
>> > (I'm of course open to counter-arguments on this point, so
>> > please let me know if you feel differently.)
>>
>> The counter argument is that _all_ user-configurable variables
>> should be defined with `defcustom'.
> just like we should all be using MS Windows and Word...
That's hardly a fair comparison, everyone knows that there aren't any
valid reasons or excuses for using M$. But...
Why would you not use `defcustom'? It makes life a lot easier for the
novice to intermediate user, and doesn't hinder the advanced user in
any way. From a user's perspective, there is no down-side to Ebib
using `defcustom'.
Footnotes:
[1] Yes, sometimes you need to use `customize-set-variable' instead
of `setq', but that is only necessary in special circumstances.
--
|---<Steve Youngs>---------------<GnuPG KeyID: A94B3003>---|
| I am Dyslexic of Borg. |
| Fusistance is retile. Your arse will be laminated. |
|------------------------------------<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>---|
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 312 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum=ebib-users/attachments/20060820/5f4c457b/attachment.bin
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 13:23:07 +1000
From: Steve Youngs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [Ebib-users] Fwd: Ebib 0.25 released!
To: Ebib Users <[email protected]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Keywords: think,ebib
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
* Jesse Alama <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Steve Youngs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> * Joost Kremers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > Jesse made a few other suggestions, that I'm considering
>> > incorporating. One thing I think I won't do, is to use Emacs'
>> > standard customisation interface (M-x customize) for Ebib.
>>
>> I'm not sure how much of Ebib is customisable, but I think this
>> is a mistake.
> Huh?
I think it is a mistake to _not_ take advantage of Custom.
>> One last tangent before I finish... Why oh why isn't the manual
>> in Texinfo format? From there you could generate your PDF and
>> HTML, while the rest of us can read the Ebib manual inside our
>> emacs in info. :-)
> I agree that the documentation should be available within the
> Info system. I've taken up the task of converting Joost's LaTeX
> documentation to TeXinfo.
Excellent!
--
|---<Steve Youngs>---------------<GnuPG KeyID: A94B3003>---|
| I am Dyslexic of Borg. |
| Fusistance is retile. Your arse will be laminated. |
|------------------------------------<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>---|
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 312 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum=ebib-users/attachments/20060820/a5d1e77f/attachment.bin
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 11:51:35 +0200
From: Joost Kremers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [Ebib-users] Ebib 0.25 released!
To: Ebib Users <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Sun, Aug 20, 2006 at 01:07:05PM +1000, Steve Youngs wrote:
> * Joost Kremers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Sat, Aug 19, 2006 at 05:08:46PM +1000, Steve Youngs wrote:
>
> [key bindings]
>
> >> In what way were they not customisable before?
>
> > you needed to hack the source before.
>
> No you didn't. You added some `define-key' forms to your init.el/.emacs.
does the define-key trigger the autoload of ebib? if not, it wouldn't work,
because the keys would then get redefined once ebib is loaded. AFAICS, at
least...
> > but someone that knows latex cannot be assumed to know elisp
>
> Perhaps not, but I think the average LaTeX user, especially the
> emacs-brandishing LaTeX user, wouldn't have too much of a problem.
i figured that kind of user wouldn't have a problem with an rc file, so no
need for defcustom. ;-)
> >> > Plus, I feel that the little customisation that Ebib might need
> >> > can easily be handled through .ebibrc.
> >>
> >> OK, I'm heading off on a bit of a tangent here, but, from what I can
> >> see, there isn't anything in .ebibrc that couldn't be left in
> >> ebib.el. I don't see the need to have an rc file. Couldn't you just
> >> state in the manual... "if you want to add your own entry types, put
> >> (defentry foo-entry (...)) into your init.el/.emacs" ?
>
> > well, that would be an option, but that would kinda defeat the
> > purpose of using autoload.
>
> How so? It shouldn't change things at all in that regard.
well, defining an autoload for ebib.el in .emacs and then two lines later
using a macro that causes emacs to load ebib.el seem a bit silly to me. of
course, that would only apply to users that want to customise something in
ebib.
> >> > (I'm of course open to counter-arguments on this point, so
> >> > please let me know if you feel differently.)
> >>
> >> The counter argument is that _all_ user-configurable variables
> >> should be defined with `defcustom'.
>
> > just like we should all be using MS Windows and Word...
>
> That's hardly a fair comparison,
that is true. ;-)
> Why would you not use `defcustom'?
because i'm a lazy developer, and if i suspect that no-one will actually
use it, i don't want to spend my time adding it to ebib. ;-)
> It makes life a lot easier for the
> novice to intermediate user, and doesn't hinder the advanced user in
> any way. From a user's perspective, there is no down-side to Ebib
> using `defcustom'.
point taken.
--
Joost Kremers, PhD
Graduate College "Satzarten"
J.W. Goethe University, Frankfurt am Main
Varrentrappstrasse 40-42
60486 Frankfurt am Main
Germany
Tel. +49 69 798 28050
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 23:31:46 +1000
From: Steve Youngs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [Ebib-users] Ebib 0.25 released!
To: Ebib Users <[email protected]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Keywords: ebib,autoload,load,key,bindings
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
* Joost Kremers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, Aug 20, 2006 at 01:07:05PM +1000, Steve Youngs wrote:
>> * Joost Kremers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > On Sat, Aug 19, 2006 at 05:08:46PM +1000, Steve Youngs wrote:
>>
>> [key bindings]
>>
>> >> In what way were they not customisable before?
>>
>> > you needed to hack the source before.
>>
>> No you didn't. You added some `define-key' forms to your init.el/.emacs.
> does the define-key trigger the autoload of ebib?
No, you would have to load ebib via `require' or `load' instead of
`autoload' if you wanted to define your own key bindings. Otherwise
the keymaps wouldn't be defined and you'd get a void variable error.
Yeah, that negates any benefit of loading via autoload, but what you
need to think of is...
o Only users who wanted to customise their key bindings for ebib
would miss the autoload benefit.
o The majority of your users won't add their own binding for ebib so
they can load via `autoload' if they so choose without any
trouble.
o The benefits of loading ebib via `autoload' are _incredibly_
small.
> if not, it wouldn't work, because the keys would then get redefined
> once ebib is loaded. AFAICS, at least...
No, it couldn't happen, ebib.el needs to be loaded _before_.
--
|---<Steve Youngs>---------------<GnuPG KeyID: A94B3003>---|
| I am Dyslexic of Borg. |
| Fusistance is retile. Your arse will be laminated. |
|------------------------------------<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>---|
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 312 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum=ebib-users/attachments/20060820/1302f582/attachment.bin
------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Ebib-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ebib-users
End of Ebib-users Digest, Vol 1, Issue 6
****************************************
