Re: question on buffer-file-coding-system

Stephen J. Turnbull writes: > Agreed. I think your strategy of defining a default of 'raw-text-unix > if file coding is not compiled in is appropriate. It has the correct > semantics. Note that this is exactly what we do for the specifier > tags at the end of lisp/specifier.el. Anyway, we're moving in the > direction of making file-coding (but not Mule, yet!) the default > configuration. But, of course, we have to keep the packages safe for people who are running older XEmacsen. For instance, I was running 21.1.14, and did a package update, and suddenly "hexl" was broken. My fear is that people will make mods to the package lisp, test on an XEmacs 21.5 or something, and not notice that the changes are not safe for 21.1.x users. I'm not sure what the solution to this is, other than just being really careful when updating packages, and making sure that they work not only on the latest and greatest XEmacs but also on any XEmacs new enough to grok the package system.