GNU bug report logs - #37562
26.2; Obsolete vt-control and vt100-led

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 37562 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 37562 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Nicolas Semrau <nicolas.semrau <at> gmail.com>
To: bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
Subject: 26.2; Obsolete vt-control and vt100-led
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2019 18:49:56 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Five years ago, Stefan Monnier asked if vt100-led.el and vt-control.el
could be obsoleted.[1] Since there was no objection at the time (and
the hardware certainly not gaining in popularity since then), I propose
to go through with declaring /lisp/vt-control.el and /lisp/vt100-led.el
obsolete.

[1] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2014-05/msg00169.html

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #8 received at 37562 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Nicolas Semrau <nicolas.semrau <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 37562 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#37562: 26.2; Obsolete vt-control and vt100-led
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2019 21:27:02 +0300

> From: Nicolas Semrau <nicolas.semrau <at> gmail.com>
> Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2019 18:49:56 +0200
> 
> Five years ago, Stefan Monnier asked if vt100-led.el and vt-control.el
> could be obsoleted.[1] Since there was no objection at the time (and
> the hardware certainly not gaining in popularity since then), I propose
> to go through with declaring /lisp/vt-control.el and /lisp/vt100-led.el
> obsolete.

Aren't they useful with lisp/term/vtXXX.el, which we didn't yet
obsolete?

Message #11 received at 37562 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: Nicolas Semrau <nicolas.semrau <at> gmail.com>, 37562 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
Subject: Re: bug#37562: 26.2; Obsolete vt-control and vt100-led
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2019 05:19:14 +0100

Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:

>> From: Nicolas Semrau <nicolas.semrau <at> gmail.com>
>> Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2019 18:49:56 +0200
>> 
>> Five years ago, Stefan Monnier asked if vt100-led.el and vt-control.el
>> could be obsoleted.[1] Since there was no objection at the time (and
>> the hardware certainly not gaining in popularity since then), I propose
>> to go through with declaring /lisp/vt-control.el and /lisp/vt100-led.el
>> obsolete.
>
> Aren't they useful with lisp/term/vtXXX.el, which we didn't yet
> obsolete?

Is there any reason not to obsolete lisp/term/vtXXX.el as well?

Best regards,
Stefan Kangas

Message #16 received at 37562 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
Cc: nicolas.semrau <at> gmail.com, 37562 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca
Subject: Re: bug#37562: 26.2; Obsolete vt-control and vt100-led
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2019 16:27:41 +0200

> From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
> Cc: Nicolas Semrau <nicolas.semrau <at> gmail.com>,  37562 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
>  Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
> Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2019 05:19:14 +0100
> 
> > Aren't they useful with lisp/term/vtXXX.el, which we didn't yet
> > obsolete?
> 
> Is there any reason not to obsolete lisp/term/vtXXX.el as well?

I think they are still being used, albeit rarely, with emulators of
those old terminals.

Message #19 received at 37562 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: nicolas.semrau <at> gmail.com, 37562 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
Subject: Re: bug#37562: 26.2; Obsolete vt-control and vt100-led
Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2019 01:02:35 +0100

Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:

> > > Aren't they useful with lisp/term/vtXXX.el, which we didn't yet
> > > obsolete?
> >
> > Is there any reason not to obsolete lisp/term/vtXXX.el as well?
>
> I think they are still being used, albeit rarely, with emulators of
> those old terminals.

Would it make sense to mark them as obsolete and if anyone complains
to create a new ELPA package for them instead?  We could even say in
NEWS that, in case anyone is still using this, we would appreciate it
if they reported back to emacs-devel or somesuch.  (I think I've seen
that being done once before, so there is some precedent.)

My objective in writing this is to figure out a way forward for the
original request/suggestion, but I don't feel very strongly about it.
However, if we can't find a reasonable way to do this, or if we don't
want to, I think we're better off closing this as wontfix.

Thanks in advance.

Best regards,
Stefan Kangas

Message #22 received at 37562 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
Cc: nicolas.semrau <at> gmail.com, 37562 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca
Subject: Re: bug#37562: 26.2; Obsolete vt-control and vt100-led
Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2019 11:57:58 +0200

> From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
> Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2019 01:02:35 +0100
> Cc: nicolas.semrau <at> gmail.com, 37562 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, 
> 	Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
> 
> Would it make sense to mark them as obsolete and if anyone complains
> to create a new ELPA package for them instead?  We could even say in
> NEWS that, in case anyone is still using this, we would appreciate it
> if they reported back to emacs-devel or somesuch.  (I think I've seen
> that being done once before, so there is some precedent.)
> 
> My objective in writing this is to figure out a way forward for the
> original request/suggestion, but I don't feel very strongly about it.
> However, if we can't find a reasonable way to do this, or if we don't
> want to, I think we're better off closing this as wontfix.

I prefer the latter.  This issue is so minor that we've already
invested way too much energy in it.  There's no tangible benefit in
obsoleting these tiny files.

Message #25 received at 37562 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Nicolas Semrau <nicolas.semrau <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 37562 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, stefan <at> marxist.se, monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca
Subject: Re: bug#37562: 26.2; Obsolete vt-control and vt100-led
Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2019 15:41:02 +0200

> From: Nicolas Semrau <nicolas.semrau <at> gmail.com>
> Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2019 12:45:10 +0100
> Cc: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>, 37562 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca
> 
> > There's no tangible benefit in obsoleting these tiny files.
> 
> So files like this will probably stay in the codebase indefinitely?

"Indefinitely" is a very long time.

Some time, maybe not very far away, but definitely much sooner than
"indefinitely", I will step down, and someone else will be in charge
of these decisions.  They might make a different decision about this
issue.

My personal preference is to invest energy in adding new features and
improving existing features, rather than in making such insignificant
cleanups.  YMMV.

Message #28 received at 37562 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Nicolas Semrau <nicolas.semrau <at> gmail.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 37562 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>,
 monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca
Subject: Re: bug#37562: 26.2; Obsolete vt-control and vt100-led
Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2019 12:45:10 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

> There's no tangible benefit in obsoleting these tiny files.

So files like this will probably stay in the codebase indefinitely?

I am aware that they do not make Emacs "worse", performance-wise. I
just think linting files for those unused stone-age systems is
beneficial at least in the sense of alleviating a certain "museum
piece vibe" of Emacs.
Am Fr., 8. Nov. 2019 um 10:58 Uhr schrieb Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>:

> > From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
> > Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2019 01:02:35 +0100
> > Cc: nicolas.semrau <at> gmail.com, 37562 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
> >       Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
> >
> > Would it make sense to mark them as obsolete and if anyone complains
> > to create a new ELPA package for them instead?  We could even say in
> > NEWS that, in case anyone is still using this, we would appreciate it
> > if they reported back to emacs-devel or somesuch.  (I think I've seen
> > that being done once before, so there is some precedent.)
> >
> > My objective in writing this is to figure out a way forward for the
> > original request/suggestion, but I don't feel very strongly about it.
> > However, if we can't find a reasonable way to do this, or if we don't
> > want to, I think we're better off closing this as wontfix.
>
> I prefer the latter.  This issue is so minor that we've already
> invested way too much energy in it.  There's no tangible benefit in
> obsoleting these tiny files.
>

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #31 received at 37562 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
To: Nicolas Semrau <nicolas.semrau <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 37562 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#37562: 26.2; Obsolete vt-control and vt100-led
Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2022 19:41:58 +0100

Nicolas Semrau <nicolas.semrau <at> gmail.com> writes:

> Five years ago, Stefan Monnier asked if vt100-led.el and vt-control.el
> could be obsoleted.[1] Since there was no objection at the time (and
> the hardware certainly not gaining in popularity since then), I propose
> to go through with declaring /lisp/vt-control.el and /lisp/vt100-led.el
> obsolete.
>
> [1] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2014-05/msg00169.html

(I'm going through old bug reports that unfortunately weren't resolved
at the time.)

I've now moved them to lisp/obsolete in Emacs 29.  If it turns out that
they're useful (i.e., we get complaints from people using term/vtXXX),
then we'll reconsider, but it seems unlikely.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no

Message #36 received at 37562 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Po Lu <luangruo <at> yahoo.com>
To: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
Cc: Nicolas Semrau <nicolas.semrau <at> gmail.com>, 37562 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#37562: 26.2; Obsolete vt-control and vt100-led
Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2022 09:09:23 +0800

Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org> writes:

> Nicolas Semrau <nicolas.semrau <at> gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Five years ago, Stefan Monnier asked if vt100-led.el and vt-control.el
>> could be obsoleted.[1] Since there was no objection at the time (and
>> the hardware certainly not gaining in popularity since then), I propose
>> to go through with declaring /lisp/vt-control.el and /lisp/vt100-led.el
>> obsolete.
>>
>> [1] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2014-05/msg00169.html
>
> (I'm going through old bug reports that unfortunately weren't resolved
> at the time.)
>
> I've now moved them to lisp/obsolete in Emacs 29.  If it turns out that
> they're useful (i.e., we get complaints from people using term/vtXXX),
> then we'll reconsider, but it seems unlikely.

Some people use niche terminal emulators that have various graphical
effects aimed at resembling those old terminals, and that includes the
LEDs.

I don't know if they use the same control sequences as the real vt100,
but it's plausible.

Message #39 received at 37562 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
To: Po Lu <luangruo <at> yahoo.com>
Cc: Nicolas Semrau <nicolas.semrau <at> gmail.com>, 37562 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#37562: 26.2; Obsolete vt-control and vt100-led
Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2022 20:13:01 +0100

Po Lu <luangruo <at> yahoo.com> writes:

> Some people use niche terminal emulators that have various graphical
> effects aimed at resembling those old terminals, and that includes the
> LEDs.
>
> I don't know if they use the same control sequences as the real vt100,
> but it's plausible.

With our obsoletion pace, any theoretical users of these files have
about a decade to make themselves known.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.