Re: Missing xemacs
Guy,
I think you made the wrong decision here. James LewisMoss never
responded to the 8857 bug list to your request for pulling xemacs. In
fact, I couldn't find anyone other than yourself who supported the
decision to pull xemacs completely. The discussion was whether
xemacs-19.14 or 19.15 was the best choice for bo. Could you please
state your reasons for removing xemacs? xemacs-19.14 doesn't have any
fatal flaws. Bug 8857 suggested that 19.15 be the official bo xemacs;
it did not suggest that xemacs-19.14 be removed from bo distribution
entirely.
xemacs-19.14 and emacs conflict, but that is generally not considered
a reason for removing a package. xemacs-19.14 is usable and better
than nothing. Perhaps I misunderstood our policy, but I thought that
a package should only be removed from stable if it has a critical
bug. I didn't see any discussion on any mailing claiming that xemacs
has a critical bug. In any case, the removal of xemacs requires
further discussion.
Please reconsider the decision to pull xemacs from bo.
Guy Maor <maor@ece.utexas.edu> writes:
> sailer@sun10.sep.bnl.gov (Tim Sailer) writes:
>
> > Since I didn't get an answer on -private, I'll do this the public
> > way. Xemacs seems to be missing from bo. It's in rex and hamm. I con-
> > sider a missing major package a bug unless there was a reason it
> > was pulled. Brian? Anyone?
>
> See bug 8857.
--
Kevin Dalley
kevin@aimnet.com
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: