Ihor Radchenko <yanta...@gmail.com> writes: > +**** =outline-*= functions may no longer work correctly in Org mode > + > +The new folding backend breaks some of the =outline-*= functions that > +rely on the details of visibility state implementation in > +=outline.el=. The old Org folding backend was compatible with the > +=outline.el= folding, but it is not the case anymore with the new > +backend. From now on, using =outline-*= functions is strongly > +discouraged when working with Org files.
>From the perspective of a heavy outline-minor-mode user, who dreams of Org "backporting" its great outlining features to outline.el, that's a bit disheartening, since IIUC this will cause Org and outline.el to drift further apart? I realize this question might sound outlandish, but I'll ask it anyway: would it be feasible (and relevant) to add this new folding backend to outline.el, so that (1) /both/ Org and outline(-minor)-mode benefit from it, (2) outline.el functions keep working in Org? (Assuming outline.el could be turned into a :core GNU ELPA package, and Org would tolerate adding this dependency) I hope this doesn't come across as negative criticism; the amount of work that went into this branch is astounding, and as an Org user I'm indebted to the developers for the energy that goes into maintaining it. I just wish more of the loving care that goes into Org trickled down to outline(-minor)-mode; the last couple of months were encouraging because lots of great improvements have been added to outline.el (TAB-cycling, buttons, control over default visibility and font-locking), and those improvements enhance *every* major mode with outline-minor-mode support, so I was hoping for the trend to continue… Lest I let this message end on that sour note: great work, and thanks for the energy you put into Org!
