Hi all, Pieter Praet <pie...@praet.org> writes: > On Thu, 14 Jul 2011 19:32:18 +0200 (CEST), har...@free.fr wrote:
> Please don't *insult* our devs by calling this useless BS a "BUG", > let alone ask them to *waste* their precious time and skills on it. Mhh, I don't think it was in any way insulting to ask? OTOH, I also think Bastien was not rude :). Please keep also in mind that english is not everyones native language; this plus the fact that email as a written medium is sometimes hard(er) to interpret. You call this useless BS, not worth a bugreport. Well, it seems to me Harven is new to the list and to org. In debianstyle bug context, something like: ,---- | Severity: *Wishlist* | Subject: Please consider making '*' not hardcoded | | Hi, I use orgmode and I really like it; thanks! | However, using emacs for a while, I got used to the fact that | everything is configurable; orgmode itself with its hundreds of | variables to customize its behaviour is a prime example. | However, I tried to get accustomed to the stars as outline indicators, I | also tried the org-hide-leading-stars, but I can't get used to it. | I would really love to see this configurable: | Emacs, got unicode, lets make use of that! Imagine something like "•". | If emacs were the old ascii only text editor it used to be, I would not | even have considered it: You devs included picture/pdf/etc. display in | Buffers and spoiled me ;). | I really don't know how much work this would be, I just wanted to voice | my opinion on it (hence *wishlist*). | | Thanks | Memnon `---- would be acceptable I think. (Note: This is purely fictional, I really don't care, personally). It would then probably stay there, either with Bastien answering something like: ,---- | Hi, the "*" is hardcoded from the projects start and it would mean | significant work to change that. I *might* tackle this someday, but | don't hold your breath. `---- or he would close it and tag it "won't fix" with a similar reply. > If you manage to implement it yourself, you're welcome to send your > patch to the list. We might need it someday, when we -in a bout of > insanity- decide our target audience somehow includes twelve-year-olds. Belittleing a possible contribution before it was even started? That however is close to rude *imho*... Memnon P.S.: I deliberately waited a day to reply to this message. I really like this list and its well behaved attitude: This is a nice place. While I also stumbled at the "rude" and basically agree to your assessment, Pieter, I found your reply a tad too agressive for my taste. So I had to be the "advocatus diaboli" ;).