Re: Thoughts on XEmacs packaging (was Re: Making docdir configurable)
Valdis Kletnieks <Valdis.Kletnieks(a)vt.edu> writes in xemacs-beta(a)xemacs.org:
...
As packages proliferate, you *will* need to be able to say thinks
like:
"I'm the sysadmin, and user1 needs to use (require
'foobar '(atleast 3.8))
but user2 insists on having a (require 'foobar '(exactly 3.7)) because
foobar 3.8 Breaks Really Badly if run with QuuzBaz 0.9.34.
We have to do this now, assuming that XEmacs will continue to support
not compiling in Mule. If this statement does not make any sense,
please look at the new ps-print source code in the testing directory
on the FTP site and image what XEmacs/NoMule will have to look like in
order to take advantage of it, then imagine other common packages
being rewritten in the same fashion.
Or maybe no one cares and we can drop XEmacs/no-Mule entirely ...
--
BEGIN chic and refined products for your urban single life.
- found lurking on a Japanese microwave oven