I will have to agree. I come from blender the 3d application and up to version 2.49 blender did not allow modfiable shortcuts and if you have used a 3d app you know how crucial shortcuts are . Well I knew a lot of people that did not use blender only because of this. In 2.5 blender developer was clear that realised their mistakes and one of the correction was the addition of modifiable shortcuts. Guess what where the sets of shortcuts first released. 3dstudio max and maya, obviously because most people have been coming from those applications.

Frankly I dont trust an application or its developers to tell me what is a good shortcut for me. Oh by the way I come from emacs, and emacs shortcuts suck big time :D ... still I love emacs but I would not use it if it did not allow me to modify those shortcuts.And as you might guessed I did not use Blender before 2.5 for the same reason.

Having a standard set of shortcuts is the easy way for documentation and tutorials, but generally speeking the first thing a user tends to customise in application is the shortcuts. Because people have diffirent needs and use diffirent parts of application.

From: Camillo Bruni <camillobruni@gmail.com>
To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr
Sent: Friday, 24 August 2012, 1:37
Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] New Text Completion suggestions

On 2012-08-23, at 19:50, Stephan Eggermont <stephan@stack.nl> wrote:

> Camillo wrote:
>> So you're saying modifiable keyboard shortcuts are a bad design?
>
> Yes.
>
> That is to say, using them outside of developing a good set of
> key bindings (possibly for each language/keyboard). We need them
> to get to this consistent set. Options could be on the level of
> vi/wordstar/emacs style.

I see 3 versions here, I add vim, BOOM flamewar :D.
so no options, is no option, forget it... whenever there will be
an emacs keybinding set, I will bribe people until I have a
corresponding vim set :D