RE: Deprecate _emacs on Windows

[Drew Adams]

> > How about to make the warning interactive? giving the user the
> > posibility to let Emacs rename the file right there when the warning
> > is prompt?
> >
> > "_emacs is obsolete, do you want to let Emacs rename it to 
> > .emacs now? (y/n)"

BTW, IIUC it is not yet obsolete - it is still supported.  It is being
deprecated at this time, not desupported.
 
> Are you trying to provoke Drew a heart attack?

Can't resist, can you?  Drop the snide remarks, please.  It's not about me,
Juanma, remember?  Stop trying to caricature me.

> Or, more seriously, that would be too intrusive IMO, and you would
> need to add a way to silence it anway (in case the user does not want
> to rename it).

Actually, IMO the suggestion is a reasonable one.

My point was that this information for the user is not a warning of anything, so
it should not scream WARNING.  (I also think it is more appropriate to convey
deprecation info in NEWS and manual, but a non-warning message is OK if it is an
addition.)

As with some other places in Emacs, the user response to the question could be
more than a binary choice.  E.g., (a) rename now, (b) do nothing now, and (c) do
not rename and don't remind me again.  With either (a) or (c) the user will see
the message only once.

Dunno whether there might be any problem from doing this at its current position
during startup: lots of stuff can go on before (just a guess) and after
(definitely) the message appears.  Maybe it should wait until Emacs is idle for
some given period?  Dunno.

Interrupting the user also has the advantage that s?he will necessarily see the
message.  In my case, the *Warning* buffer appeared (splitting the window)
briefly, and then disappeared as the rest of my startup sequence finished.  If I
had not noticed the window-split briefly I would not have been aware that there
was a *Warning* buffer somewhere with a message for me.  Some users with a
shorter startup sequence might well miss it.  (And no, please do not just add a
long `sleep-for' or something.)

On the other hand, perhaps something would need to be done to inhibit the
message when Emacs is used in batch mode.  But that is perhaps in order anyway,
regardless of whether the message asks the user a question.  Maybe this has
already been taken care of - dunno.