On 12/23/05, Richard M. Stallman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Changes were installed for encryption in allout in some specific way, > using packages that aren't in Emacs rather than the support that is in > Emacs, perhaps with modifications.
perhaps you're referring to my initial allout topic encryption changes, which used facilities from crypt++ and mailcrypt? someone suggested using pgg instead, and started some changes there (to implement symmetric-key encryption) which would enable me to do so. i refined their pgg changes, added some general pgg fixes, and switched over allout's new encryption to use the modified pgg. it's all checked in to the gnu repository, and comes with the head emacs 22 checkout. > Could you please be more specific? I never knew all that much about > allout. All I know is that it does a more powerful kind of outlining. > > Oh, I see allout.el was changed to use pgg.el, which was also used by > Gnus. Is that the change you are criticizing? > > Allout isn't actually documented i have no texinfo documentation for allout. there are a lot of instructions and other information in the docstrings, eg the one for allout-mode, but no cohesive user guide. > and appears to duplicate the standard outline functionality except > with the obsolete selective display method of ooutline.el. if you are saying that allout provides no more functionality than outline.el, you are mistaken. as far as i can see, outline.el provides only for navigating outlines. allout provides for topic-oriented authoring and editing, including topic creation, cohesive topic/subtopic promotion, demotion, and structured cut and paste across varying depths. it also provides dynamic exposure and reconcealment of hidden items during isearch, customizable topic prefix strings, topic encryption, and much more. you are right that it still uses the old selective display mechanism. i recently received a suggestion to use invisibility, instead (with some example code) and am consider switching over to that. i am more interested in switching over to hierarchical widgets (something derived from the tree widget), and am actively working on a long-term project along those lines, using allout format as the external representation. i don't expect to have releasable code for that for a while, though. > Well, it is another outliner, so it would need to include the basic > functionality of outlines. Are you saying that it could use > outline.el instead of duplicate it? That would indeed be cleaner--if > it is feasible. allout is backwards compatable with outline.el in that it supports outline.el's format, and provides similar navigation functionality. the reverse is not the case - outline.el cannot handle most common formatted outlines, much less custom ones, outline.el lacks some of allout's navigation features (eg, hotspot navigation), and completely lacks (as far as i can tell) the outline authoring and editing features. > It would be good to make that change, after the release--if it really > results in an improvement. Sometimes duplicating code makes > maintenance harder, and sometimes it makes maintenance easier. > > allout was initially installed in 1993, which was before the old > outline.el became ooutline.el. Thus, what happened was that we > updated outline.el to use overlays but didn't update allout.el. > > It would be good to make that change, after the release. i'll devote some attention to that. i'm reluctant to spend much energy changing to invisiblity and tuning that when i'm ultimately heading towards widgets. ken manheimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ emacs-pretest-bug mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-pretest-bug
