Re: EmacsW32 invocation options

[Juanma Barranquero]

On 5/2/07, Lennart Borgman (gmail) <lennart.borgman@gmail.com> wrote:

> It is more that the feedback at that time had to be on a more detailed
> level to be meaningful, at least for me.

I don't know whether you're joking. I was simplifying. There was
detailed criticism as well as lighter one.

> What I meant was that I perhaps could have added
> something to your view if you had tried to be more concrete at that
> time. (I am not sure I remember the details any more.)

It could have added something to your view if you had tried to accept
that some of us thought there was no time to do a proper design (much
smaller features fell off the wayside because of the "freeze"). You
didn't seem to keen on waiting.

> That is ok, but it is not my responsibility.

No, but you *are* responsible of quite aggressively promoting a
distribution that takes pride in doing some things different from the
standard one (all these things that you affirm that "do not work" or
"are very difficult" in Windows and that you've "fixed" with your
ad-hoc solutions).

            Juanma