Re: button.el (again)
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 7:01 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull <stephen(a)xemacs.org>wrote:
IMO, the question is better put as "are the API and semantics up
to
XEmacs standards and conformant with 'the way we do things'?"
A quick look at the file suggests that answers are "API, not really;
semantics, not really; style, not really."
Fair enough.
For the reasons above (and that's probably just a start), I favor
fsf-compat as the home for this file.
Okay, I find that convincing.
That said, I don't have a really strong feeling about this. Nor
am I
suggesting that you (or anyone else) need do anything about my gripes
before adding the file.
I'm reluctant to address the issues you point out, because there is already
code in the wild that depends on the API as defined by Emacs. Stuff may
break if the API is changed. So fsf-compat it is until somebody feels like
fixing the API along with all of its users in our packages. Thanks for the
review.
--
Jerry James
http://www.jamezone.org/
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta