Re: Upstream support of XEmacs in AUCTeX

This is correct. Well it seems that I misunderstood your announcement. On one hand I appreciate all your efforts of even providing a xemacs pkg and I can perfectly understand that you are frustrated that it did not make it way into the official xemacs pkg system. Unfortunately Xemacs does not support 3rd party pkg the same way debian dpkg or RH rpm does. I raised that subject form time to time but it seems to be a very hard problem and I myself have not enough lisp knowledge of even dreaming to provide such a functionality. So in short if you decide to drop this sort of support that is perfectly understandable (though sad), and you are right it should be our turn to provide such a pkg. However you also write in your mail David> I would thus suggest that we discontinue maintenance of the David> XEmacs-related parts of AUCTeX. It has been a resource hog, David> and only a few selected XEmacs users, those that will use our David> tarball rather than an offical XEmacs package, will ever be David> able to make use of it, anyway. David> I would also suggest that we stop investing time to figure out David> how to make AUCTeX features work on XEmacs. There is little David> point, for example, for supporting non-MULE builds. There is David> also little point in bending over backwards in designing David> operation and interfaces for areas of large incompatibilities, David> like syntax highlighting and display engine features (images, David> folding, and so on). That sounds to me that you are going to drop support of Xemacs all together and again it seems for the lack of active coders. It seems to me that there are two possiblites: - you add some new functionality but that code will not work in xemacs - you add code that may break the usability of auctex for xemacs all together. It is the second possibility which worries me a lot but all I can offer would be some testing (may be a person with knowledge and interest is reading this and would like to play a more active role in the Xemacs part of auctex). I hope that for the moment you are not really considering to break the usability of auctex for Xemacs users. Uwe Brauer _______________________________________________ XEmacs-Beta mailing list XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta