Re: [comp.emacs.xemacs] AUCTeX 11.84 released
Mats Lidell writes:
I don't even have the skill to understand what it is ;-) What
type of
support could be provided to an external build system?
What a lot of people would like is a way to take a third party package
and wrap it in XEmacs package clothing without doing any quality
control against other XEmacs packages.
In many cases, that will work just fine, either because the package
has no important dependencies on other packages, or because the
upstream project does careful testing itself. But:
I see a quality issue here. The current build system might be lame
but
it tries to support each package to build against the right
dependencies etc. If a package would be given more freedom in how to
perform the build the risc of subtle problems would also increase.
Precisely. Inclusion of a package in the XEmacs package tree is (a) a
certification that XEmacs developers have looked at it and (b) built
it in the context of the XEmacs packages, and (c) a promise that we'll
at least look at bug reports against it, especially those involving
interaction with other packages. It's not a claim that we do a better
job than upstream; it's a claim that we did *something*. We can't
make that claim if we simply redistribute a pre-built tarball.
"Support" is a strong word for what we have the manpower to do at the
moment:-(, but I see no argument at all for including 3rd party
packages sight unseen. I do see an argument for making it easier to
access 3rd party download sites that provide a package containing
XEmacs-style metadata which unpacks into the installed package tree
appropriately.
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta