Re: go-lang

Mats Lidell writes: If I were in it for the fun (in that sense), I wouldn't be doing *any* of the things I do for XEmacs .... (That is not a threat or a complaint, of course I have my reasons for doing them.) See http://www.jwz.org/doc/cadt.html for how responsible head maintainers think about fun. N.B. Producing new version 0.8s repeatedly is nothing to be ashamed of in XEmacs (unless you want to be ashamed of it<wink/>). Sure, it's unprofessional, but most of us aren't here in our professional capacities. More generally, I don't demand that you do the "the parts of programming that *aren't fun*". But I *ask* that you help out those of us who do care about getting those things done (at least a little bit) by reporting issues against 21.4 that your new packages bring to light. syntax-ppss is trivial, AFAICT. *Most* of the internal stuff is going to be like that. Unicode Inside can't be ported to 21.4. Bidi redisplay can't be ported to 21.4. Lexical let can't be ported to 21.4. But most new features of the Lisp language and editor functions can be added on in fsf-compat or so. Whether they can be made efficient enough to be useful in serious use is dubious in many cases, of course. But at least that gives users a chance to *try* the new packages in 21.4, and *then* decide to migrate to 21.5 (21.6? 22.0?) to get performant implementation. I think that's much more likely to produce a user who is willing to work with 21.5 than forcing them to try 21.5 and discover all its warts (including the ones we think are features!) *before* even starting with the new package. _______________________________________________ XEmacs-Beta mailing list XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta