Re: Changed list indentation behavior: how to revert?

[Stefan Nobis]

"Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide" <arne_bab@web.de> writes:

> Sad story short:...

I'm with you - last weekend I upgrade my OS and had quite some trouble
to get everything working again and still have some nasty hoops to
jump through.

But on the other side: What are we talking about?

Org had a given default configuration for quite some time. To be
clear: THIS DID NOT CHANGE!

But some people are upset now. Why? Because the emergent behaviour
changed. Not the underlying default configuration, but in the context
and details of how each individual uses Org for some users the default
configuration was emergent and evident, but some other users did not
perceive this default configuration.

Now a simple setting, syncing Org with the defaults of Emacs and other
modes with respect to RET and electric-indent-mode, make the OLD,
UNCHANGED default configuration emergent for almost all users.

These are very subtle effects inside a very complex environment.

How should maintainers be able to foresee all possible environments
and use cases and the resulting emergent behaviour?

I'm really surprised that such a simple and insignificant breaking
change results in such a uproar. If a new Org version make all old
files completely unusable or a bunch of important features is totally
broken, say nothing of babel works anymore - yes, is such a case I
would understand the uproar.

But ranting so loudly and insistent and continuously over such a minor
details is really beyond me.

And nobody has to read all NEWS and Changelogs for every single peace
of software they are using. If nothing breaks maybe there is nothing
to worry about. If some minor detail like the new emergent indentation
behaviour annoys you - just have a quick look in the NEWS file of the
new version. Is this really that hard?

On the other hand: What's the alternative? Never change anything
again? Maybe some users rely on the emergent behaviour of some bad
bug (that has bad consequences for some other users). Should it never
be changed, because it may annoy some users and they could be forced
to read the NEWS file?

You cannot have the cookie and eat it!

So, everyone, please calm down and try not to overreact over really
simple, negligible details.

-- 
Until the next mail...,
Stefan.