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

Re: `~/.xemacs/{init,.options}.el' (Was: Re: [XEmacs] New Maintainer, soonish.)

karlheg@cathcart.sysc.pdx.edu (Karl M. Hegbloom) writes:

>     Jan> No. This is a MAJOR user interface change. And frankly, I
>     Jan> think it is _not_ part of the job you are doing. If you want
>     Jan> to help develop XEmacs thats more than OK with me. But please
>     Jan> use the regular channels for that and not use your position
>     Jan> as a Debian for that.
>  I don't think it's a major change.  It's a small patch.  It's not
>  complicated.  It's not extensive.

I disagree.  If you make this change, I will lobby my hardest to make
sure that the new, incompable package is denied entrace into the
Debian archive.

Several senior Debian developers, including the Emacsen-common and
archive maintainer, Richard Braakman, have weighed in on the issue,
and all disagree with you.

>  It's silly to expect newbies (there will be many installing the
>  package) to edit `~/.emacs/' codes, and to maintain two branches
>  inside of it to cope with both GNU Emacs and XEmacs.  Granted, they
>  will likely stick to one or the other, but will try both to begin
>  with.

Its silly to suprise users by changing the user init file.  Suddenly
running XEmacs21 is different from XEmacs20 and every other emacsen in
Debian. Suddenly XEmacs21 on Debian is utterly incompatible with
XEmacs on a non-Debian system.

How can you brush off these objections?  How can you claim you are
doing *users* a favor by having an incompatible, differently named
init file?

.....Adam Di Carlo....adam@onShore.com.....<URL:http://www.onShore.com/>

Reply to: