Re: xemacs vs emacs
"Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen(a)xemacs.org> writes:
William Xu writes:
> Does Aquamacs really count as a fork?
It's a separately maintained branch that will not be merged in the
foreseeable future but is continuously updated with both syncs to the
original and new features of its own. If that's not a fork, what do
you want to call it?
Separately maintained branch. The mark of a fork is divergence.
As I wrote, Aquamacs is a friendly fork.
I thought you read emacs-devel? On the other hand, reading emacs-devel
might give the impression that Emacs is an unfriendly fork of Emacs,
so...
But redundant effort is still involved, and the communities are
still
split.
There is not much redundancy I see. I am not sure about the split
communities, either. We had split communities in a way for the unicode2
branch and the multitty branch.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta