Re: PROPOSAL: Repurpose one key and reserve it for third-party packages

[Thibaut Verron]

2021-02-10 11:42 UTC+01:00, Alfred M. Szmidt <ams@gnu.org>:
> Since Magit is a VC like mode, wouldn't it make more sense to put it
> under C-x v?  E.g., why cannot Magit rebind C-x v l -- which I guess
> is similar to magit-status or possibly C-x v d.
>
> From a users perspective, making it seemingly a part of VC-mode makes
> more sense than trying to make it a special citizen that needs to take
> C-x g (or whatever) since it would make it hard to use MaGit,
> MaFossil, MaSubersion (last two are fictious) .... together.  Magit
> only makes sense for a git repository, you might want to have C-x v l
> (or some other status command) invoke the different "viewer".  If
> Magit (e.g.) has other global bindings that make sense for version
> control, those also make more sense to put under C-x v.

The problem is that magit-status is both a "visualization" mode,
similar to C-x v d or C-x v l, and a "dispatcher" mode, similar to C-x
v.

An example of usage includes, for example, C-x g c - a c <enter a
commit message> C-c C-c.
This is the equivalent of git commit -a <enter commit message> C-x C-s
C-x k RET.
I can't see a 'vc-commit' function in C-x v, but if there was one, C-x
g c would essentially replace it.
Similarly C-x g P is a vc-push, C-x g F is a (hypothetical) vc-fetch,
C-x g d is a vc-diff, etc.

As such, magit would be better seen as a replacement of the whole vc
keymap than as a part of it. And I don't know if anybody uses both
magit and vc-mode for git version control.
(I occasionally use vc-merge-conflict, but this is not on C-x v.)

But I'm not claiming that rebinding C-x v to magit whenever we are in
a git repository would be a good idea. :)