Re: Release plans

[A Soare]

> A Soare wrote:
> >>> Quite so! Investing energy to develop it under Windows is (almost) loss 
> >>> of energy!
> >> Yes, I understood that this is what you meant. But in what way did you 
> >> reach this conclusion?
> > 
> > By induction. I do not use Windows, and in linux I use emacs for lots of 
> > purposes.
> 
> So you mean that for you personal benefits there is no use in developing 
> Emacs under Windows? ;-)

I do not say that for _my_benefit_. I say that in general almost nobody use 
emacs in windows. There are exceptions, quite so. But I have never seen 
exceptions.


> 
> >>> I know a few cases of _good_ programmers at google, microsoft, etc that 
> >>> never thought to use emacs.
> >>>
> >>> The reason: Windows has nicer environments to write C++, Delphi, C# etc. 
> >>> (that is what they told me).
> >> Then how can it be good to develop Emacs under any operating system?
> > 
> > In Emacs under Linux for Linux!
> 
> Did you mention any reason that I did not notice?

Personally I always use emacs, and I need nothing else. I tell _exactly_ what I 
heard that the others say. For me it is not useful under windows, and I have 
never heard a windows user to use it.

> >>> Emacs and Linux is used just by peuple that wants to understand how 
> >>> things work.
> >> Do you say that there is no use for Emacs?
> > 
> > In windows, yes, that is what I say. In Windows it is completely unuseful.
> 
> Then why is there a use for it under Linux? It seems like you are saying 
> that software under Linux is inferior to the corresponding software 
> under Windows and because of this Emacs can be useful on Linux.

No, there is no contradiction in what I say.

I heard many programmers that they prefer use under GNU Linux others editors. 
The same reason: they want to gain money easy in my opinion.

What choose everybody depends only of his _education_. Of his values. If you 
tell soebody "Emacs is written profesionnaly and you can learn looking at its 
sources" does not have the same effect on every person. The majority of peuple 
will say (I quote a programmer from gooooogle ) : "Yes, emacs is nice, but I do 
not like emacs, because I want to gain money, and others programmers will 
copy-paste the open source projects, and they will steal me the projects" . And 
he never used emacs.

In linux there are others C/C++ development environments than emacs that can be 
used without effort.

This discution is enless: the best is to put a button on emacs' page and to ask 
peuple to vote if they need emacs under windows, and the reason why they do.

> If that is the case why is it Emacs we develop and not something better?

I heard many saying that there are better development. If you say "emacs is 
written in lisp, so it is very customisable" they will say "oui, mais je peux 
me passer d'emacs et me debrouiller facilement avec d'autres."

> 
> >>> Windows is used by peuple that want to gain money and to arrive quiqkly 
> >>> at their purpose.
> >> Do you say that using Emacs makes it take long time to do things?
> > 
> > It takes little time when you have already learned how to use it.
>  > The first time when you did a thing, you will never choose something 
> different.
>  > Here is the point: the psychology. Peuple prefers never to make the 
> first effort,
>  > and they prefer to use something to arrive quickly at the point.
> 
> Can we use that point to do something actively? Can we make Emacs better 
> in a way that it satisfies those people's need? (Still not sacrifiying 
> other things.)

This is like demanding to a cannibal "do you want to become a chretien"? Not 
taking into account a famous tribe of cannibals that died because they lost 
their native croyance in cannibalisme, the question whether the user want to 
use emacs does not depend on emacs. But on his values in which he is educated.

So my answer is: this is not a question for programmers, but for educators and 
family.

> 
> >>> >From all my experience (all what I saw), windows interface for 
>  >>> > emacs is as important as the file ./etc/sex.6 in emacs' sources.
> >> Are you saying that this is the only part of Emacs that we should keep ;-)
> > 
> > Yes, Emacs in Linux is nice.
> 
> Why is the file etc/sex.6 so nice so that we should keep only that on 
> Linux? ;-)

>From my viewpoint, all the modules for windows are _not_ useful, i.e. they 
>have the same usefulness as this file.




____________________________________________________

Avant de prendre le volant, repérez votre itinéraire et visualisez le trafic ! 
http://itineraire.voila.fr/itineraire.html