On Mon, Oct 12, 1998 at 05:41:51PM -0400, Richard Stallman wrote:
> The people who developed XEmacs decided to split it off without ever
> trying to work with me. Because of this, I am forced to be in a
> rivalry with them.
I am sorry, I just can NOT accept that statement. I have seen too many
postings to the XEmacs list when people have CCed you or posted messages
you sent to them privately (as I am doing with this message) to find even
a shred of truth in that statement. Not only that, but I have my VERY OWN
experiences to judge by. More than once I have submitted patches to you
only to enter into weeks of haggling to try and get them accepted, and I am
GPL-safe and the FSF has all of my copyright assignments on file.
> They gained a short-term advantage by not asking contributors for
> legal papers, the way I do; that endangers the ability to enforce the
> GPL for XEmacs.
>
> Please do not help them win this rivalry. If you don't want to help
> me, at least please don't urge people to join their camp.
I am not urging anyone to do anything. All I can do is state my own experiences
and state problems as I see them. The management of the GNU Emacs project
versus the XEmacs project makes it MUCh easier to be an XEmacs developer.
Since that is what my original posting was about, lets stick to the issue at
hand. The management model that you use for the EMacs and GCC projects
simply does not lend it self to people WANTING to work on those projects.
Its that simple. Just look at the activity on the EGCS list versus the
GCC list ... look at the difference in activity on the XEMacs list versus
activity on the (very private) Emacs beta lists. The model of keeping
development releases "hidden" or "private" from the general public doesnt
work. The model of forcing developers into YOUR way of thinking and having
to defend their every patch doesnt work. Thats the issue at hand. But I
will state, for the record, that if asked for an opinion by, say a random
developer, which project he should contribute to (EGCS versus GCC, XEmacs
versus GNU Emacs), I have to admit that I would recommend that they stay
as far away from GCC and GNU Emacs as they can, and that is very sad. The
work you have done, and the goals you are striving for are very worthwhile
and I support the GOALS and CONCEPTS ... I just dont support the projects
that try to achieve those goals. Its all free software after all ... who cares
if its for XEmacs or GNU Emacs, EGCS or GCC. The users are the ones who
can make up their own minds in the end ... the whole concept of free software
and freedom of source is to spark improvement. I see both EGCS and XEmacs
improving in ways that matter more to me and in a quicker manner than I
see their GNU counterparts doing, and thats the bottom line.
Dare I say it, but you seem to be reaping the rewards of your goals. You
wanted people to have free access to source code, so that they could learn
and help improve software. This is happeneing ... whats the fuss?
--
J. Kean Johnston | "Every day, computers are making people easier
Engineer, SPG | to use" -- Source unknown.
Santa Cruz, CA +----------------------------------------------------------
Tel: 831-427-7569 Fax: 831-429-1887 E-mail: jkj(a)sco.com