Re: Fwd: sign off on XEmacs 21.5
David Kastrup writes:
"Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen(a)xemacs.org> writes:
> "Distribution" of standalone packages outside of the
packages is
> already possible, as VM and AUCTeX have proved.
"packages" in quotes or tarballs according to the terminology you demand
from others.
In the case of VM, no quotes are required; it is a package, built with
the XEmacs package infrastructure.
> What people seem to want to avoid is the use of the build
> infrastructure. In theory it should be possible to do
[...]
> and an XEmacs package will show up shortly in your staging directory.
>
> But of course nobody has ever been willing to test it out.
I am sure that Uwe (for example) would have been quite willing to test
it out if you had bothered to mention this years ago.
I did. I specifically discussed this with the upstream maintainer of
x-symbol, in a conversation that took place on XEmacs Beta. He
refused to have anything to do with build infrastructure (he wanted a
self-contained Makefile), at which point Uwe offered to maintain
x-symbol for us.
No, I didn't ask Uwe, or anyone else, to test in the no-dependencies
control-files-only tree. It's a theoretical possibility, but no
official package will ever be built that way because of the broken
REQUIRES Make variable.
It is little details like that which make working for XEmacs so
gratifying. You get required information years after you need it
with a "Doh".
I don't understand what makes you think this information is useful,
let alone "required".
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta