>>>> "Hrvoje" == Hrvoje Niksic
<hniksic(a)srce.hr> writes:
Hrvoje> "Stephen J. Turnbull" <turnbull(a)sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> writes:
> That is not your burden, it's ours, of course (ours == the
> "create .xemacs/{init,options}.el and be done with it" camp).
> But we'd appreciate your help if you choose to give it!
Hrvoje> What help do you need? Haven't I mailed an example of a
Hrvoje> `startup-choose' function?
I missed it. That's what I hoped for, I'll go find it.
> As long as we're postponing this, I think we should
completely
> disable searching for .xemacs/init.el for 21.0.
Hrvoje> I don't see a good reason to do this.
Undocumented user customization features which are likely to shortly
become documented features with a somewhat different interface are a
pain in the neck to deal with. When users ask questions about .emacs,
and I show them examples from my ~/.xemacs/init.el, they want to know
why they can't clean up their home directories with a single .xemacs
directory containing all of their junk pertaining to XEmacs.
These days I don't lie and say "You can't" since one guy tried it
anyway (with a different program) and it worked, then proceeded to
break when the interface got publically released in a different form.
Hrvoje> It would simply break setups of people on this list
Hrvoje> without achieving any useful goal.
Some setups are going to get broken anyway. If their init.el setup
doesn't get broken, their personal packages will. Michael Sperber has
said he will veto any arrangement with user-init-directory == personal-
package-root. QED
We obviously have a different evaluation of the relative likelihoods
and importance of the different forms of breakage. I concede; you
probably know more about both.