Re: Intent package mule2 and custom-mule (Important for emacs (lisp) package maintainers)
On Wed, Oct 20, 1999 at 01:08:00AM +0900, Takao KAWAMURA wrote:
> > What do you think about emacs19? emacs19 is old and obsolate editor, isn't it?
>
> Yes. I think emacs19 should be removed from Debian in the
> future. However it exists now. Having a *new* obsolete
> editor is another thing.
Well, the difference between emacs19 and emacs20 is about 10 MB diskspace
I am running a space constrained system, and users do want emacs, and are
happy with emacs19. What would you do?
I keep emacs19 installed.
(and do not tell me that diskspace is cheap.... unless you are willing to
donate me a disk :-))
emacs is a lot like M$ word...more and more bloat with each new version
I realize the "historical inevitability" though (emacs19 is not installable
anymore), but something along the lines of fvwm would not be bad
(fvwm1 (lightweight, old) vs. fvwm (feature-full, new)).
Perhaps emacs-old or emacs-light would be appropriate.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------
| Radovan Garabik http://melkor.dnp.fmph.uniba.sk/~garabik/ |
| __..--^^^--..__ garabik @ fmph.uniba.sk |
-----------------------------------------------------------
Antivirus alert: file .signature infected by signature virus.
Hi! I'm a signature virus! Copy me into your signature file to help me spread!
Reply to: