Re: xemacs vs emacs

"Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen(a)xemacs.org&gt; writes: Somebody has to pick up the slack. It is a non-goal, but a frequent advertising item. Which I find kind of distasteful. Stephen, when you feel yourself unable to utter anything which can't be in good conscience supported by a shred of evidence, please just keep quiet. This is actually slander and I am quite annoyed at your frequent repetition of such stuff. The AUCTeX project actually _provides_ a perfectly working and reasonably maintained XEmacs package _for_ the XEmacs package system, which the _XEmacs_ team _refuses_ to distribute for, well, matters of principle, citing quality concern policies (never mind that their quality control leads to several year old packages with faulty XEmacs integration being distributed rather than working packages from upstream). And I've gone out of my way to help XEmacs developers understand the AUCTeX structure, providing example versions, providing information about the setup, explaining every bit of it and supporting them wherever I could. What I won't do is to change AUCTeX's build infrastructure into one supporting XEmacs-only, depending on XEmacs CVS access and being developed in the XEmacs package repository. Making AUCTeX work for XEmacs and within the XEmacs package tree and supporting XEmacs developers for getting it into their system in a manner where they don't need to adapt sane policies for external package development has been a resource drain for AUCTeX development. Against all the sabotage of the XEmacs policy setters, we have prevailed for the sake of XEmacs users to provide a working setup for them. And there has been more than one time where I (and others) have made sure that XEmacs compatibility (which often is a major PITA because the XEmacs core code base is not even up to Emacs 22.1 level consistently) does not go off the radar. It is fine that you have repeatedly stated that helping AUCTeX get into XEmacs proper is not a priority for you. But please stop actively sabotaging the support from others, and if it is only by spreading lies and derogatory remarks about their efforts. It is enough work supporting XEmacs and XEmacs users against the general XEmacs apathy and your passive resistance without you spitting on us. So again: if you don't have anything positive to contribute, just shut up instead of denigrating the efforts of those that actually _do_ contribute. The job of a project leader as I understand it does not consist of keeping the obituaries pretty and the blame assigned elsewhere. It means keeping the development going or saying or doing those things that support it. If you feel that this is not what you can or should care about, maybe you should look for somebody else taking up the place at the helm, so that you can write your opinion pieces from a position where they cause less damage to XEmacs. Thanks. -- 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