> IMHO all mirror bindings should to be the same in all *tla*
> buffers ... some time ago I bound all of them to "s" for
> "*S*ynchronize Mirror" ... now they are inconsistent again!
I'm working on xtla-defs.el these days, especially tla-inventory-mode-map.
There are many modes in xtla, so getting consent all binding in all modes
may be difficult. Instead, I have expressed what I think the best on
tla-inventory-mode-map. Now I have written almost all what I think the
best in the mode map. (I think tla-inventory-mode is the important mode.)
; BTW
; (define-key map tla--keyvec-remove 'tla-inventory-remove-files)
; (define-key map [?X] 'tla-inventory-delete-files)
;
; These two are the rest I don't think the best. It is not easy for me
; to know the difference between delete and remove.)
So give me the feed back about tla-inventory-mode-map.
I think other modes are the next steps. Currently I don't take care
other modes. Soon these situations are solved.
> Well, I do not want to start a binding flame war, but having
> the same prefixes for "semantically" equivalent commands is
> IMHO an good idea ...
I, myself has not good ability to read English quickly. So It is not
easy for me to jump into the fire. However, you, don't be afraid the
flame about the binding. The important things are:
1. The binding should be useful for normal user. It should not
be too specific for xtla hackers.
2. Summarize the result of discussion in elisp in xtla-defs.el.
docs/BINDINGS was good place to start for me.
Again:
> but having
> the same prefixes for "semantically" equivalent commands is
> IMHO an good idea ...
I'm happy to hear from you.
> BTW "Synchronize Mirror" is better than "Mirror" as an menu
> item. MIRROR is no verb (for me), i.e. it does not tell me
> what this item will do to the mirror, but SYNCHRONIZE makes
> it clear to me.
Please, fix in your tree.
Masatake YAMATO
