Re: C-x C-q more useful as toggle-read-only

[Francesco Potorti`]

Not only  that.  Also  it is intuitive  only in  some cases, and  not in
others.  For example, I work with  CVS, and I never use read-only files,
so using C-xC-q to commit my changes would be rather awkward to me, as I
am accustomed  to C-xC-q meaning  toggle-read-only.  But this  annoys me
also when under RCS.  I sometimes want  to make a small change to a file
without checking it  out, just to evaluate a  modified elisp expression,
for example, or to cut and paste  it to a different buffer.  Thus I need
to make the buffer writable without involving vc at all.

But  these are  only examples.   The real  truth is  that C-xC-q  and VC
should have nothing to do with  each other, except possibly as an expert
option, as Michael J Downes correctly points out.

In fact, since  the first day I  tried VC (shortly after it  was out), I
did this in my .emacs:

;;; Addition to 19.30
;;; Ask before using version control: maybe toggle-read-only is enough
(defadvice vc-toggle-read-only (around vc-ask activate)
  (if (and (vc-backend buffer-file-name)
           (y-or-n-p "Toggle version control status? "))
      ad-do-it
    (toggle-read-only)))

And, in  fact, it only  serves as a  safety net, as  I never use  it.  I
*always* use C-xvv, which is more natural and intuitive with me.