[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: EmacsW32 invocation options

From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: Re: EmacsW32 invocation options
Date: Fri, 04 May 2007 11:14:06 +0300

> From: Hadron <address@hidden>
> Date: Thu, 03 May 2007 13:36:59 +0200
> I have often found in the development world that sometimes "additional
> thought" is a euphemism for "not today, not tomorrow, maybe in a few
> years when I have nothing better to do".

It is the task of whoever suggests a change to convince the other
developers of its virtue.  Failure to convince them should give you a
more objective estimate of its _real_ virtue, because the other
developers normally provide reasoning for why they dislike the
suggestion.  If you (or anyone else who is reading this) want to learn
about those reasons, I invite you to read the relevant discussions on
emacs-devel and emacs-pretest-bug.

As things frequently are with changes suggested by Lennart that other
developers don't like, Lennart will continue arguing and will not
accept differing opinions or modify his suggestions according to
comments he receives, no matter what.  When such endless and futile
arguments go out of control, it is quite possible that someone would
say "additional thought" meaning "not now, and I don't care when".
But you can hardly accuse people who don't want their scarce free time
devoted to work on Emacs be monopolized by a long heated discussion
leading nowhere, can you?  When cornered, people would do anything to
cut their losses.

> There are times when it can benefit a development to let the young
> guns go blazing and see what happens. Sometimes :-;

Sometimes, yes.  When development stagnates, for example, or if major
usability features are rejected by a dictatorship-like clique for no
good reason.  If you find evidence of these in the discussions related
to the change suggested by Lennart that is the issue of this thread,
please do point that out.

> >> Is
> >> Lennart open to suggestions for improvement from the people who actually
> >> use it?
> >
> > That's a good question.
> >
> >             Juanma
> And one fairly easy to answer - yes. But note the important bit - "from
> those who actually use it".

I think a more accurate answer is ``yes, if he agrees with the

And I don't see why one needs to actually use an Emacs where server is
started by default to be eligible for an opinion on that.  It's not
that understanding the implications of this requires actual

reply via email to

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