>>>> "David" == David Kastrup
David> It is certainly more than enough trouble for me trying to
David> try to keep the stuff I maintain basically running with
David> XEmacs. I certainly won't volunteer for more. As it is,
David> XEmacs is already causing me more work than I'd care for.
It's possible it would be _less_ work than dealing with (for example)
regular bug reports from people using old versions of AUC-TeX on
XEmacs, and people trying to set up preview-latex on XEmacs without a
package. (Eg, I've had _no_ set up questions about latin-unity that
weren't due to real bugs. The user had the set up right, it just
didn't work.) Set up costs of an XEmacs package for the maintainer
are non-negligible, but not that high. We'd help substantially with
that. Maintenance cost of the package infrastructure is mostly borne
by XEmacs people.
I can't promise the results I've seen (latin-unity is a unusually
setup-free package), but AUC-TeX is typical of the status of large 3rd
party packages that are maintained by the XEmacs Dev Team. Packages
maintained by their owners or by someone close to the package core are
usually more up-to-date. This will make your users happier, for sure.
Or maybe you can find someone who keeps up-to-date with AUC-TeX or
preview-latex who would be willing to keep the XEmacs repository
David> I'd so this, if at all, on a strictly tit for tat basis:
David> somebody implement a well-working package system for both
David> Emacs and XEmacs, and packages will appear.
Implementation is done, and you know that, David. Getting the UI and
maintenance infrastructure into GNU Emacs is not under our control.
RMS flat-out refused to consider it on at least two occasions, and a
few months ago an effort to do something cooperative, initiated IIRC
by Mike Sperber and which eventually included serious discussion about
the package system, petered out once again, I'm not sure why.
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp
University of Tsukuba Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
Ask not how you can "do" free software business;
ask what your business can "do for" free software.