emacs-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: Changes for emacs 28


From: Ihor Radchenko
Subject: Re: Changes for emacs 28
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2020 00:01:32 +0800

>> Beware: they are outdated (more than 10 years old, and many items in
>> our menus were changed since then).  More importantly, Xah is known
>> to be violently anti-FSF/GNU, and even anti-RMS, let alone full of NIH
>> tendencies.  His recommendations are rarely provided with any
>> rationale except "the current situation is silly/stupid", and should
>> therefore be taken with a grain of salt.
>>
>> That said, it is of course okay to consider the ideas that make sense,
>> but not just "because Xah said so".
> Thanks for explaining the background.
>
> If someone does look over that list, they should check to see which are
> still relevant and provide some rationale for the change.

That article is mostly reasonable, except some rants about FSF
"advertisement". I will double check with latest Emacs menu and split
the relevant suggestions from the article into separate bug reports.

Best,
Ihor




Stefan Kangas <stefankangas@gmail.com> writes:

> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>
>>> Could you submit that as a new bug report?
>>
>> Separate bug reports for each item or a group of related items,
>> please.  Let's not have one bug report about dozens of menu items
>> unrelated to each other.
>
> Indeed, thanks for pointing that out!
>
>> Beware: they are outdated (more than 10 years old, and many items in
>> our menus were changed since then).  More importantly, Xah is known
>> to be violently anti-FSF/GNU, and even anti-RMS, let alone full of NIH
>> tendencies.  His recommendations are rarely provided with any
>> rationale except "the current situation is silly/stupid", and should
>> therefore be taken with a grain of salt.
>>
>> That said, it is of course okay to consider the ideas that make sense,
>> but not just "because Xah said so".
>
> Thanks for explaining the background.
>
> If someone does look over that list, they should check to see which are
> still relevant and provide some rationale for the change.



reply via email to

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