Hello, Ingo Lohmar <i.loh...@gmail.com> writes:
> What I have in mind for starters: > > Add orthogonal internal functions that can handle *all* sensible > combinations of requirements. Then rewrite existing commands in terms > of these, but possibly adding new ones. > > I would not want to break any workflows, of course. But in the *long* > run, we could rethink if the existing commands and their prefix-arg > behavior are really what users want, or if we provide other ones by > default. > > Does that sound reasonable, or are there any grave obstacles I did not > consider, or any hard reasons why such changes could not be accepted? I think, as a starter, we should discuss and agree on how the UI should be. IMO, implementation follows, not the other way around. WDYT? Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou
