Re: master 11f10dc0d0b: Update etc/rgb.txt from X.Org upstream

[Stefan Kangas]

Po Lu <luangruo@yahoo.com> writes:

> Stefan Kangas <stefankangas@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> While using portable colors is a concern, it seems orthogonal.  X.Org
>> ships with these colors, and as things stand, nothing is stopping them
>> from being used.  We could perhaps recommend against using them, and
>> not much else.
>
> We shouldn't distribute non-standard color files in the first place:

I don't know which standard this is referring to.  XFree86R6?

> users should have no occasion to use them, so the less places they are
> mentioned or available in, the better.

AFAIK, nothing is stopping their use on X.Org so, whatever you and I
might think of it, it is clear that users can and will use them.

>> Reverting will mean that these colors won't work for users on some of
>> our most commonly used platforms.  That's all.  Is it good practice to
>> leave such things broken on some platforms, in the hope that it will
>> be enough to provoke Emacs Lisp developers to fix it on some others?
>
> Yes, since "web" colors are easily specified through their RGB values,
> and "x11" colors are identical to their unprefixed progenitors.

I didn't ask if alternatives existed, but if we should leave this
non-working on some of our most commonly used systems for the benefit of
Solaris users (the only example given so far).  I see no catastrophe
either way, to be quite honest.

Anyways, you seem to care more strongly than I do, so I'll leave the
decision to you.  I remain unconvinced, but we can agree to disagree.
For next time, please consider that it might be more collaborative to
wait with reverting, to make sure that all viewpoints are fully
considered.