Re: [PATCH] Xft patch reloaded, #3
Vin Shelton <acs(a)xemacs.org> writes:
>> Our intention never was to fix this mess! We never intended
>> to. All we did was adding another, separate and independent, font
>> model
>
> But that's exactly what Stephen is objecting to!
>
> Someone who did want to fix the mess is facing a harder job if he also
> had to take Xft into account. I'm not sure if that's a good enough
> reason to "stop progress", but I certainly see Stephen's point.
>
> I'm really undecided on this one.
I have not looked at the patch, but vetoing it on the principle that
the Great Font Unification will be impeded by this work is not
conducive to progress, in my opinion.
I don't see it as vetoing on principle. Stephen's point seems to be
that, in the current code base, Xft can be added only as a kludge. As
a result, the patch makes XEmacs harder to maintain, even though it's
prettier to behold.
For me the even more important point is that the Xft patch is, by
Matthias's own admission, completely broken under Mule. If that is
not enough for a veto, I don't know what is.