Re: `~/.xemacs/{init,.options}.el' (Was: Re: [XEmacs] New Maintainer, soonish.)
>> "Karl" == Karl M Hegbloom <karlheg@cathcart.sysc.pdx.edu> writes:
Karl> I disagree, and will ship the package with the modification. Don't
Karl> bother filing a bug about it... This is a minor change, not a hairy
Karl> major code fork. It's not a meaningful political act, just part of
Karl> the job I'm doing.
[...]
Karl> I will, after developing something that works and looks good, submit
Karl> patches "upstream", for certain. They will be reviewed, and perhaps
Karl> will become part of XEmacs 21.2 or 21.3, depending upon timeing and
Karl> whatever-it-takes. It's not a strange new idea.
I believe you realy should turn this around. Write your proposal down,
list the consequences, and the reasons you thing this is a change for
the good.
Then ask the xemacs developers for opinion and points against
this. You may find that they have objections you didn't think or know
about.
But make this a RFC thing, don't say you will do it nevertheless, and
also act like this - really consider their opinion.
Maybe this will change your opinion, maybe not, but it will at least
give valuable comments.
I once had an idea that I though was great. When I presented it to the
author, he pointed out ot some details I didn't think about, and I
dropped this idea, as it turned out unsuitable.
Ciao,
Martin
Reply to: