[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Emacs 24.0.93 Pretest Windows Binaries published

From: Ted Zlatanov
Subject: Re: Emacs 24.0.93 Pretest Windows Binaries published
Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2012 16:46:17 -0500
User-agent: Gnus/5.130002 (Ma Gnus v0.2) Emacs/24.0.93 (gnu/linux)

On Thu, 2 Feb 2012 11:52:25 -0800 "Drew Adams" <address@hidden> wrote: 

DA> The readme is the only place we mention other Windows 
DA> binaries - e.g. image binaries.  Why treat GnuTLS specially?  
DA> Either mention GnuTLS only in the readme (preferred)
DA> or mention in the announcement each of the binaries
DA> that mentioned in the readme (not preferred).
>> I requested that GnuTLS be treated specially.  I believe this is
>> necessary because it's important for secure networking on W32, unlike
>> any of the other libraries.  This is a temporary remedy; I 
>> will work on a W32 installer and then it won't be necessary
>> to mention GnuTLS explicitly (a link to the installer in the
>> announcement would be sufficient).

DA> 1. According to Eli, "It's an email authentication package."  Which would 
DA> that it is needed only by people who use Emacs for email.

DA> At a minimum, that should be pointed out in the brief description that 
needs to
DA> accompany this "special treatment".

DA> And that's the case wherever we choose to describe GnuTLS.  (And it should 
DA> described in the README, irregardless of whether it is described in the
DA> announcement.)

GnuTLS provides SSL and TLS encryption for any network connection, hence
"secure networking" in my earlier message.  It can encrypt e-mail
protocols like IMAP and SMTP but does not deal with e-mail messages.

DA> 2. I'm not familiar with your proposed "installer", but I certainly hope 
that we
DA> will continue to distribute a simple zip archive with a Windows binary.

DA> A priori, I for one will not use an installer to "install" the binary.  I 
DA> multiple Emacs Windows binaries, and I do not need an Emacs installer 
DA> about with my registry etc.  This is one reason I do not use Lennart's
DA> installer, for instance.

DA> It is blindingly simple for a user to unzip an archive in a directory of 
DA> and create a startup shortcut.  Nothing to it.

DA> What's the motivation for this installer?  I can understand Lennart's
DA> motivation, since he has apparently customized many things, including at 
the C
DA> level.  But why do you think Emacs users on Windows need an installer for
DA> vanilla Emacs?

DA> I have nothing against the general idea of our providing an installer in
DA> _addition_ to our providing zip archives, but I would not want to see the 
DA> practice dropped.

Any installer I assemble will not replace the Emacs binaries and will
not be as "official" as Christoph's binaries.  It will not involve
emacs-devel resources, at least.

I've covered the reasons for the installer on this list, going back and
forth over several alternatives.  This was a very recent thread.  An
installer seems to be the best approach but you can read through the
discussion and decide for yourself.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]