Re: Unified file-name syntax?
Michael Sperber <sperber(a)deinprogramm.de> writes:
> Major concern was that EFS could be broken in package
> management.
It seems to me both syntaxes could co-exist because of the added colon
in the unified syntax. Am I wrong?
The "added colon" is optional. If you have set tramp-default-method,
you don't need a method specification in the file name, and the syntax
looks pretty like EFS.
> There was also the suggestion that a unified syntax shall be
closed to
> URL syntax; this would need an agreement with the GNU Emacs people.
I see it was discussed on xemacs-beta. Was there ever any progress on
the discussion with GNU Emacs?
That was before my time with Tramp. That means, more than 5 years ago.
Yet one more issue I hadn't kept current on. While I dislike the
v3
switch for the same reason Stephen has, I can't say I have any concrete
objection, either, and I can't find any statement in the mailing lists
that say anybody else does. (I may be wrong, though.)
Could we work around this by having Tramp not be auto-activated, but
requiring some explicit (require 'tramp) or (turn-on-tramp) or something?
Stephen did negotiate with the FSF licensing clerk. I'll let it to him
for continuation. And of course, I'll be happy to contribute latest
Tramp to XEmacs once this problem is solved.
Best regards, Michael.
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta