Re: Failure building packages (Vin Shelton)
Mats Lidell writes:
>>>>> Stephen J Turnbull <stephen(a)xemacs.org>
writes:
> It's arguable that auto-autoloads should not insinuate menus, but I
> tend to think that is actually a good idea, as long as the only menu
> that is affected is a list of auto-insinuated behaviors (in a
> general sense, not just Ben's implementation) that can be enabled.
Could this as well be handled by customize?
Keeping state (whether a particular user has enabled the behavior or
not) can and should be done in customize. Whether menus shold be
insinuated or not, and if so, what form that should take, are style
guide/policy issues. I don't see any reason what the insinuation
would be implemented by customize, though. That's not what it's for.
customize-behaviours?
Just `(defgroup 'behavior ,list-of-behaviors)' and M-x customize-group
will do for what customize can handle now. Maybe a bit of additional
infrastructure to make it easy to add a new behavior to that custom
group.
I suppose it's theoretically possible that behaviors themselves could
be implemented in customize, but Ben didn't do that, and his scanty
notes suggest there were reasons he didn't.
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta