>>> Can you propose a patch?
 >>
 >> I can *try*. I am absolutely not a C programmer, but as long as the
task
 >> is limited to a monkey see, monkey do situation for handling a new face
 >> I should be able to hammer something useful together.
 >
 > That's one way to become a C programmer ...

To be honest I've don't really like C as a language, and learning it
would not do anything professionally for me either. So I'm jumping into
this strictly for the sake of improving Emacs.

 >> and I would like to put it into a single function accessible from
 >> anywhere. Is that the right call, and if yes, where would be the right
 >> place to put it?
 >
 > This is the first time I see the internal border face getting remapped.
 > I wasn't aware that nsterm.c does that and I'm not sure whether we
 > should add something similar to xterm.c and w32term.c. In nsterm.c I
 > would not write an extra function but instead of what we have now use
 >
 > int face_id =
 > (FRAME_PARENT_FRAME (f)
 > ? (!NILP (Vface_remapping_alist)
 > ? lookup_basic_face (NULL, f, CHILD_FRAME_BORDER_FACE_ID)
 > : CHILD_FRAME_BORDER_FACE_ID)
 > : (!NILP (Vface_remapping_alist)
 > ? lookup_basic_face (NULL, f, INTERNAL_BORDER_FACE_ID)
 > : INTERNAL_BORDER_FACE_ID));

x, ns and w32 all used the same code, so I changed them all to look like
this now.

 >> - Currently the actual width of the border is still controlled by the
 >> `internal-border-width` parameter for both frame types. Should I try to
 >> do something about that as well? If yes, what's my entry point?
 >
 > Add a 'child-frame-border-width' parameter. But in this case I would
 > propose to proceed as follows:
 >
 > - If for a frame the 'child-frame-border-width' was explicitly set, use
 > it.
 >
 > - If it was not set, use the 'internal-border-width' parameter.

That's done now too, at least for X. I'll attach patches of my first
working drafts for both changes. Let me know if I'm on the right path so
far.

 >> - I think I'll need to sign the FSF copyright assignment, unless the
 >> limit is higher than the 15 lines I am remembering.
 >
 > I think so too.
 >

Ok, what do I do?