bug#66780: [PATCH] Improve rectangle-mark-mode when transient-mark-mode is off

[Jens Schmidt]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> From: Jens Schmidt <jschmidt4gnu@vodafonemail.de>
>> Cc: Stefan Kangas <stefankangas@gmail.com>,  66780@debbugs.gnu.org
>> Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2023 18:36:49 +0200
>> 
>> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>> 
>> It's not only my "personal preferences and use patterns".  See Sean's
>> bug#42663 plus Michael's bug#16066.  So every now and then somebody
>> having transient-mark-mode switched off comes across this.
>
> Yes, I know.  But that doesn't remove the need to justify a change to
> Emacs.

And what justifies a change?  Let's focus on the lighter change: What
would justify this?  More frequent user demand?

>> > Why do you insist on making these changes in upstream, to
>> > affect everyone else [...]
>> 
>> It's not "everyone else".  My solution of adding a conditional minor
>> mode lighter has been designed to specifically affect (== help) only
>> those that do not use permanent transient-mark-mode.
>
> It's one more minor mode with one more lighter.  So yes, it affects
> everyone else.

By its mere presence in `minor-mode-alist', mapping to a variable there
that is nil most of the time?  How would that affect you, for example?

>> > Once again I ask: why not
>> > make these changes, or others that you propose, in your own local
>> > Emacs, and be done?
>>                       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> 
>> That's a rather discouraging request.  [...]
>>
>> Or, in other words: Which of my change requests so far had truly the
>> quality to affect me and only me?
>
> Are you asking about the 3 suggestions in this bug report?

The double plural you have been using in "these change*s*, or other*s*
that you propose" seemed to refer to changes other than those dicussed
in this report.  I take it you did not mean that and will continue to
file bugs.  After all, most of my past reports had some effect on Emacs,
and almost always the one I intended.