Re: Future of XEmacs

Mats Lidell writes: Of course. But remember what started this thread: a developer who was having trouble using XEmacs with the packages he wanted. Problem is, Emacsen in general don't have "isolation", and GNU Emacs is way worse than XEmacs on this ground. We need both approaches, or we'll just cruftify rapidly. Most of the actual development work I've done on XEmacs has been to fix *shit* ported from GNU Emacs hastily, just enough to work for the developer involved, who typically then disappears. (To be honest, most of it was reasonable in GNU, it was a porting job that didn't account for the real technical differences between XEmacs and GNU, but some of it already was pretty icky.) I agree with your assessment that we'll make a lot of progress by upgrading packages, and I don't want to discourage anyone from doing that. But let's at least pray for some folks who want to do generic syncs and true ports of Emacs concepts to XEmacs code. All of them. ;-) I'm currently working on VM, off and on, lately more off than on. _______________________________________________ XEmacs-Beta mailing list XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta