[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Windows emacs-25.1 i686 vs x86_64?

From: Phillip Lord
Subject: Re: Windows emacs-25.1 i686 vs x86_64?
Date: Sat, 05 Nov 2016 22:26:38 +0000
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1.50 (gnu/linux)

Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:

> [Moving this to emacs-devel.]
>> From: address@hidden (Phillip Lord)
>> Cc: address@hidden
>> Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2016 10:19:30 +0000
>> > The name of the file is not important, since it's supposed to be
>> > renamed when it's put into the distribution.  So I'd rather not change
>> > the name, because doing so makes investigating repository history
>> > harder.
>> Okay, I'll restore that, and commit to emacs-25.
> I made some minor changes in the file.  Please make sure to leave 2
> spaces between sentences, per our conventions (your commit log
> messages have the same problem, btw).

Yes, indeed, I do forget this often.  It's a convention I have long
dropped in my normal writing if I ever did it.  I will try and remember.

Incidentally, M-q seems to remove the double space.  Am I doing it wrong?

> Also, please don't remove information about Windows 9X, as the 32-bit
> MS-Windows build of Emacs still supports that.

I would argue against this. I removed the material on Windows 9x since
it has long since reached EOL -- 10 years, or 25% of Emacs' existance.
While providing this information somewhere might be useful, having it in
this readme mostly serves to make the readme and to some extent Emacs
appear unmaintained. In addition, it also makes the documentation longer
which adds to the impression that Emacs is hard to use.

I'd be happy to look for somewhere else to put this information, if you
think it need to be retained.


reply via email to

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