Right there with you. My primary org file has a section filled with
rage when some default gets changed in org or some other part of
Emacs. The vast majority of the time the underlying change was in the
NEWS. Since there is already a habit of updating the NEWS it doesn't
seem unreasonable to put all those changes somewhere in an elisp file
that could restore old default behavior.

On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 2:41 PM Bill Burdick <bill.burd...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Ugh, I update my emacs package pretty infrequently and I usually have 30 or 
> more packages updating at a time -- I can't see wading through 30 NEWS files 
> searching for landmines...
>
>
> -- Bill
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 9:10 PM Tom Gillespie <tgb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Semver is unlikely to help because the question is what is "broken" by
>> a change in version. Semver would likely be about breaking changes to
>> internal org apis, not changes to default behavior that affect users,
>> so you have two different "semantics" which put us right back where we
>> are now -- to know what really changed you have to read the NEWS.
>> Bastien has also talked about hear-ye versioning, which says when a
>> version changes users need to read the news. Best,
>> Tom
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 1:15 PM gyro funch <gyromagne...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > On 11/16/2020 9:26 AM, Tom Gillespie wrote:
>> > > Would it help if major releases maintained a mini-config that if added
>> > > to init.el would allow users to retain old behavior? That way they
>> > > wouldn't have to read the NEWS but could just add the relevant lines,
>> > > or maybe even just call the org-old-default-behavior-9.1 or
>> > > org-old-default-behavior-9.4. The workflow during development would be
>> > > to account for any change to defaults in those functions. Thoughts?
>> > > Tom
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> > I hate to open a new can of worms, but could semantic versioning be used
>> > such that it is obvious when there are changes that are not backwards
>> > compatible?
>> >
>> > -gyro
>> >
>> >
>>

Reply via email to