[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Emacs and GFortran
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: Emacs and GFortran |
Date: |
Fri, 03 Nov 2006 14:45:53 +0200 |
> Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2006 23:20:32 +0100
> From: Paul Thomas <address@hidden>
> Cc: Steve Kargl <address@hidden>,
> address@hidden, address@hidden,
> address@hidden
>
> Hostility, such as it is, has been triggered by the hectoring attitude
> of those who have crept out of the woodwork to add their halfpenny worth
> to this thread; none of whom have contributed to gfortran, as far as I
> know.
If this paragraph does not have hostility written all over it, then
perhaps I don't know what hostility is.
FYI, those who ``crept out of the woodwork'' did so only _after_ the
complaints about the non-standard error messages were met with clearly
hostile attitude and ``NO'' responses. Perhaps you missed that while
reading the long thread, with some messages out of order due to mail
delivery delays.
> I rather think that the steering committee would support the
> gfortran maintainers, were it to come to that.
If it is really important to you to know, we could start a discussion
with them.
- Re: Emacs and GFortran, (continued)
- Re: Emacs and GFortran, David Kastrup, 2006/11/15
- Re: Emacs and GFortran, David Kastrup, 2006/11/15
- Re: Emacs and GFortran, Andrew Pinski, 2006/11/15
- Re: Emacs and GFortran, David Kastrup, 2006/11/15
- Re: Emacs and GFortran, Richard Stallman, 2006/11/16
- Re: Emacs and GFortran, Steven Bosscher, 2006/11/03
- Re: Emacs and GFortran, Eli Zaretskii, 2006/11/03
- Re: Emacs and GFortran, Richard Stallman, 2006/11/04
- Re: Emacs and GFortran, Eli Zaretskii, 2006/11/03
Re: Emacs and GFortran, Paul Thomas, 2006/11/03
- Re: Emacs and GFortran,
Eli Zaretskii <=