From xemacs-m  Mon Jan  6 16:36:39 1997
Received: from mercury.Sun.COM (mercury.Sun.COM [192.9.25.1])
          by xemacs.cs.uiuc.edu (8.8.4/8.8.4) with SMTP
	  id QAA00359 for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 16:36:38 -0600 (CST)
Received: from Canada.Sun.COM ([129.155.1.11]) by mercury.Sun.COM (SMI-8.6/mail.byaddr) with SMTP id OAA00835 for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 14:36:08 -0800
Received: from scooter.canada.sun.com by Canada.Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA04052; Mon, 6 Jan 97 17:36:07 EST
Received: from detlev.canada.sun.com by scooter.canada.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id RAA15301; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 17:36:05 -0500
Received: by detlev.canada.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id RAA00436; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 17:37:22 -0500
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 17:37:22 -0500
Message-Id: <199701062237.RAA00436@detlev.canada.sun.com>
From: Georg Nikodym <georgn@Canada.Sun.COM>
To: XEmacs Beta Mailing List <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>
Subject: single minibuffer frame
Reply-To: georgn@Canada.Sun.COM
X-Face:  ,~EI@l7'&P{\d++e`EMjNTNpzsxJPg(H]?Sd_T3xIlq[(PT[.D;A_/k)qfeC@m\/1]A{vZD
 r4&Lme-/M]c'Q>>:VM|L^<ED=j@dG!ld,bQ:IhT53q'x>6wZKH3iCT6Ff1-`*z{vCiT}+%(irA6TOn
 S~pFtml1bL\=kp%0PsLcF3+Q/e${o|S/<NUFDrU@;^o(D+av1g>Ce=ztlPGb$?up%c-*l'wmjw\sw;
 D__0Z;+93I+Kx6Mxdc]+|2V03aE@D8-fMT_v[~~FC9I\*|72QVW,aQ!`hHp_.gE.W&kxla2#)\Cmo
Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.100)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII


So, I'm trying out the single minibuffer frame thing that someone
posted and I have mixed feelings about it.

Pro:

 1. One place to look for messages.

Con:

 1. If you make a frame on a different device (like another X display)
    it also uses the original minibuffer.  This is decidedly uncool
    when the new frame is at home and the minibuffer is at the
    office...
 2. Occasionally strange interactions occur (focus automatically
    changes, then post-command-hook barfs something about window
    configuration into the *Warning* buffer, etc) which are harmless
    but annoying.
 3. Occasionally strange interactions occur that can be harmful.
    Example, replying to mail using VM/Supercite.  New frame pops up
    with message stealing focus from minibuffer frame that is
    prompting for an attribution tag.
 4. Incoming mail, reported by reportmail, results in focus being
    stolen from current frame.

I bring all this up since putting it into the sample.emacs commented
or otherwise result in hew and cry on the newgroup post release...  I
think that information on an Epoch style minibuffer belongs in the FAQ
with all the appropriate warnings...

I'll be turning it all off now...

