bug#13276: 24.2.50; apropos-variable

[Drew Adams]

> I'm not interested in being right or getting things perfect,
> I'm interested in improving them by contributing directly.

I contributed the same suggestion wrt `apropos-variable' directly many years
ago.  Nothing wrong with contributing directly.

No one has criticised you or what you are interested in.  I'm glad that you
contributed to getting this change made finally.

Contributing directly is not in contradiction with trying to DTRT when
contributing.

One can argue that `apropos-user-option' _is_ the right thing.  Or one can state
that s?he has no time to contribute to getting the name right.  Nothing wrong
with either of those.

But I do not see any logical contradiction between "contributing directly" and
trying to DTRT - in this case, trying to get the name right.

> Criticism is welcome,

Thank you so much.  But please recognize that my criticism has not been of you
or anyone else.  No one is criticizing you.

My arguments have been only about why Emacs should use this name instead of that
name.  I too am trying to "improve things by contributing directly" my proposals
and supporting reasons.

Thinking about and discussing what should be done can contribute to improving
things just as much as committing changes to the code base.  Behind code there
is design.

> but please do remember everyone's time
> is more than precious: it's invaluable.

Everyone's, including mine.  My contributions, which take time, are intended to
help.

No one requires you to consider them or to reply.  If you don't have the time or
are not interested, no problem.

This new name will likely be around for quite a while.  If it is
`apropos-user-option' then we will live with that.  It's not a big deal that it
does not fit with the other commands regarding options and faces.

But while we're at it, we could just do it right.

> So sorry, but I won't discuss this further.  If you want to
> submit a patch, please do so

If there is a decision to revert to the name `apropos-option' then I will gladly
submit a patch to do that.

> -- you said earlier that you already explained why you
> don't contribute directly,

No idea what that means.  I contribute directly all the time, and I am doing so
now.  If you mean committing code then no, I do not do that.  I have no
programmer tools on my laptop (which belongs to my employer), and I do not
intend to have any.

If someone else does not want to commit a patch I submit that has been agreed
upon, so be it.  If a patch or a suggestion I submit is not agreed upon, so be
it.

I do not decide things for Emacs Dev.  And I do not commit to the Emacs
source-code tree.  Other than that, I contribute in many ways, all of which I
consider to be "direct".

Best,

  Drew