Martyn Jago <martyn.j...@btinternet.com> writes: > Hi > > Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaz...@gmail.com> writes: > >> Hello, >> >> Eric Schulte <eric.schu...@gmx.com> writes: >> >>> Well maybe we should roll back this change. >> >> Please don't. _That_ would be a regression. >> > > These changes /have/ caused a software regression, and should be > reverted immediately, since: > > - they change current expected and implemented behavior to the cost of > users expectations and current use, with no prior discussion and > agreement on behavior changes >
I'm inclined to agree. I've just reverted the removal of results folding pending further discussion. I apologize for the inconvenience. > > It has been proven that to achieve the required consistency set out by > this thread /without/ breaking current expectations is less than > straight-forward, and the changes should therefore be moved to > EXPERIMENTAL - at least until the changes are proven not to break > current expectations. > > Much of org-mode is currently inconsistent - and while it is highly > desirable to improve on that situation, it should not become the major > decision to change code at the cost of regression - org-mode is a very > practical system used successfully by lots of (very appreciative) > people, and while all users appreciate bug fixes / enhancements in the > fast-moving repository that is org-mode (thanks Carsten), clear > regression such as this should be avoided in master at all costs. > My adviser is fond of saying something along the lines of "programming languages should let you break the rules". To the extent that Org-mode is a document programming language its rules should be flexible as well. Best, > > At least that is my understanding of the development model as > established by Carsten. > > If this is /not/ the case, then many people are wasting their time > writing regression tests IMHO. > > Best, Martyn > > > [...] > > > -- Eric Schulte http://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte/