Re: Platform independent graphical display for Emacs

[Óscar Fuentes]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

> So you'd suggest to the OP to develop the software in the hope that
> all of the above will happen?  And if it doesn't, just agree for the
> results to be abandoned?  The OP would have to agree to that.

Why oh why you don't just say "go ahead and we will look at your work
when you have something to show" ?

Then, after a long time (because this project will require a loooong
time) *if* something comes out, you evaluate the result as any other
contribution and decide what to do. Why so many "what-ifs" before even
seeing the first patch and without understanding the proposal in full?
(see below.)

This is very discouraging, not only for the OP, but for any bystander
would-be contributor.

> And I fail to see how that solves the long-term maintenance problem,
> once we do accept the code.  This happened in the past, more than
> once.

Yes, because having a single, modern, sane, popular cross-platform
graphics library (let's say Skia, for instance) would make things much
worse than the current status-quo, with N entangled backends requiring
the participation of multiple experts every time a new feature is
implemented :-/

To insist: the proposed system would have three characteristics:

1. Cross-platform (as the proposal's subject says)

2. Simplicity, compared to what we have now.

3. New graphical capabilities that will make possible new high-level
   features.

I don't know why you keep ignoring point 3, which is the most important,
and reduce the proposal to "oh, someone wants to add one more graphical
backend."