[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#729660: ITP: xemacs21 -- highly customizable text editor

On Nov 16, 2013, at 12:01 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:

>Your first mail came with the argument that you think that
>xemacs is more visually appealing than emacs. Honestly, emacs
>is primarily a tool and not an optical gimmick. Visual
>appearance does not bother most users, I'd guess. Most emacs
>users use the terminal (-nw) mode anyway.

I'm not going to argue for re-inclusion of XEmacs (but I won't argue against
it either - it would be helpful for me testing some Emacs Lisp packages I care
about).  Despite being an old Lemacs and XEmacs user for years, I gave up on
XEmacs back in 2008 in favor of GNU Emacs.

I will dispute the terminal mode usage though.  Most Emacs users I know of do
use the graphical version.

>And the beef I have with xemacs is that it's development
>has factually ceased. Looking at the changes over the past
>months, I see only marginal changes [1] but no real development.

I agree that XEmacs's time has come and gone.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: