Re: Results of C-x C-q poll

[Kim F. Storm]

Andre Spiegel <address@hidden> writes:

> On Sun, 2002-07-07 at 00:04, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> 
> > But then again, maybe just popping a message is enough,
> > and I'll just have to get used to hitting `C-x v v' (instead of
> > C-x C-q) in order to make my VC-controlled buffers writable.
> 
> I will install such a change.  Although I like the C-x C-q binding very
> much, I think I have to agree with Richard that removing it (and only
> displaying a message) is the solution that does the best to reconcile
> the conflicting opinions.
> 
> For those die-hard C-x C-q users (and I'm one of them), there will still
> be the option to bind it to vc-toggle-read-only, which will continue to
> exist.

That will be fine with me.

But what about my suggestion that C-u C-x C-q does just toggle-read-only
instead of the current behaviour which is also available on C-u C-x v v
in case it is needed (I rarely - if ever - needed it myself).

-- 
Kim F. Storm <address@hidden> http://www.cua.dk