Re: The current rules for making Emacs binaries available on the net?

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

David Reitter writes:

 > In my experience, binary distributions are not necessarily
 > productive in that sense.

But remember that an Emacs "binary" distribution usually contains
source Lisp[1], and coding Lisp is the most productive way for
newcomers to contribute (and some oldtimers, too, hello Drew! :-)
Even if they've never done it before; the Emacs C code is full of
strange constructs like DEFUN and redisplay and Mule and GCPRO, and
even experienced C hackers can get turned around in it.

Footnotes:

[1] I was disgusted to discover that Ubuntu packages for my Sharp
Netwalker don't contain source for XEmacs core Lisp.