Re: Unified file-name syntax?
Michael Albinus <michael.albinus(a)gmx.de> writes:
"Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen(a)xemacs.org> writes:
> Michael Sperber writes:
>
> > I suspect this statement arose from the fact that I wasn't responsive at
> > the time this came around. (Or did anyone actively speak about against
> > "unified filename syntax"?) For this, I apologize.
>
> Something like that.... I don't recall anyone speaking against it.
>
> +1 for unified syntax (even though rcp syntax sucks...).
I found a discussion about at
<http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.xemacs.beta/16552/focus=14525>
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?
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?
But before we go into the discussion, the Tramp synchronization with
XEmacs shall be revitalised. Up to now it is stalled due to the GPLv3
issue - are there any news wrt this?
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.)
Meanwhile, this message here:
http://www.sxemacs.org/list-archives/html/sxemacs-devel/2007-08/msg00003....
has this:
> While I appreciate that Tramp is separable from the rest of
XEmacs, they're
> not exactly completely independent works, either. As I understand it, if
> you take an XEmacs package that has Tramp bundled inside that, and then
> build and install that the normal way, XEmacs will automatically load Tramp
> on startup. To a user who wasn't familiar with the XEmacs architecture,
> there would be no reason to believe that the remote editing features were
> somehow separate from the rest of the editor. So, an XEmacs+Tramp
> distribution is not mere aggregation, but instead a combination, and you
> need to follow the terms of both programs' licenses to make that
> combination. In this case, the way to do that is to follow the terms of
> GPLv3, since that's what Tramp offers, and it's an option that's
available
> for the rest of XEmacs too.
Could we work around this by having Tramp not be auto-activated, but
requiring some explicit (require 'tramp) or (turn-on-tramp) or something?
--
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta