Should Emacs Setup Utilities for MS Windows be in Emacs CVS?

Should Emacs Setup Utilities for MS Windows be in Emacs CVS?

[Lennart Borgman]

I believe that Emacs Setup Utilities for MS Windows now is nearly finished.
There should of course be CVS for it and I wonder if it should go into Emacs
CVS or somewhere else. What are your opinions about this?

My personal opinion is of course that it should be there before next
release.

There are perhaps some things in it that you have opinions about. This is
perhaps the time to bring them up?

There is one important thing that is not finished yet. The port of
emacsclient/server to w32 is not finished. Instead of this gnuclient/server
is now in the package.

This is an enhanced gnuclient/server which (as I have previously explained)
automatically starts Emacs if needed. gnuserv-start is called in the
background, the user does not have to care. (This feature can be avoided of
course.) This way of starting the server/client I believe is an important
part for MS Windows where Emacs probably will often be used as a server by
at least novice users. (I myself most often starts Emacs from the command
line this way - though that is me.)

Guy is working on the emacsclient/server port to w32, but I do not know the
state of it at the moment.

Re: Should Emacs Setup Utilities for MS Windows be in Emacs CVS?

[Kim F. Storm]

"Lennart Borgman" <lennart.borgman.073@student.lu.se> writes:

> There is one important thing that is not finished yet. The port of
> emacsclient/server to w32 is not finished. Instead of this gnuclient/server
> is now in the package.

AFAIK, the gnuclient/server cannot be included into emacs CVS, since
it includes changes from several people and we don't have the
necessary legal papers from these authors -- and we probably cannot
get them.

> Guy is working on the emacsclient/server port to w32, but I do not know the
> state of it at the moment.

That would be good - provided that Guy only apply changes that he
wrote himself (ie. he cannot just adopt arbitrary code from
gnuclient/server) and that he will sign papers for the changes.

If we decide on including your setup utilities, we need papers from
you as well.

-- 
Kim F. Storm <storm@cua.dk> http://www.cua.dk

Re: Should Emacs Setup Utilities for MS Windows be in Emacs CVS?

[Stefan Monnier]

> AFAIK, the gnuclient/server cannot be included into emacs CVS, since
> it includes changes from several people and we don't have the
> necessary legal papers from these authors -- and we probably cannot
> get them.

IIRC there's a moderately recent version for which we do have the papers (we
discussed switching to it at some point).


        Stefan

Re: Should Emacs Setup Utilities for MS Windows be in Emacs CVS?

[Kim F. Storm]

Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:

>> AFAIK, the gnuclient/server cannot be included into emacs CVS, since
>> it includes changes from several people and we don't have the
>> necessary legal papers from these authors -- and we probably cannot
>> get them.
>
> IIRC there's a moderately recent version for which we do have the papers 

Ok, so Lennart should be sure to get the right version then.

>                                                                          (we
> discussed switching to it at some point).

I assume that was before we dropped the emacsserver program?

-- 
Kim F. Storm <storm@cua.dk> http://www.cua.dk

Re: Should Emacs Setup Utilities for MS Windows be in Emacs CVS?

[Guy Gascoigne - Piggford]

There is?

How would I go about finding it?

Stefan Monnier wrote:

>>AFAIK, the gnuclient/server cannot be included into emacs CVS, since
>>it includes changes from several people and we don't have the
>>necessary legal papers from these authors -- and we probably cannot
>>get them.
>>    
>>
>
>IIRC there's a moderately recent version for which we do have the papers (we
>discussed switching to it at some point).
>
>
>        Stefan
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Emacs-devel mailing list
>Emacs-devel@gnu.org
>http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel
>
>
>
>  
>

Re: Should Emacs Setup Utilities for MS Windows be in Emacs CVS?

[Richard Stallman]

    I believe that Emacs Setup Utilities for MS Windows now is nearly finished.
    There should of course be CVS for it and I wonder if it should go into Emacs
    CVS or somewhere else. What are your opinions about this?

    My personal opinion is of course that it should be there before next
    release.

It seems ok to me, but I would like to see the opinions of the
Windows experts here.

Re: Should Emacs Setup Utilities for MS Windows be in Emacs CVS?

[David Kastrup]

Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:

>     I believe that Emacs Setup Utilities for MS Windows now is
>     nearly finished.  There should of course be CVS for it and I
>     wonder if it should go into Emacs CVS or somewhere else. What
>     are your opinions about this?
>
>     My personal opinion is of course that it should be there before
>     next release.
>
> It seems ok to me, but I would like to see the opinions of the
> Windows experts here.

I am no Windows expert at all.  My opinion, however, would be that the
installer should be made available as soon as possible, probably in
the Emacs archive.

However, it should be possible to let it package the latest stable
Emacs as well as the current developer version, and I think that
making the latest stable Emacs release available for use with the
installer might be a good idea, also leading to increased feedback.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: Should Emacs Setup Utilities for MS Windows be in Emacs CVS?

[Lennart Borgman]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Kastrup" <dak@gnu.org>

> I am no Windows expert at all.  My opinion, however, would be that the
> installer should be made available as soon as possible, probably in
> the Emacs archive.
>
> However, it should be possible to let it package the latest stable
> Emacs as well as the current developer version, and I think that
> making the latest stable Emacs release available for use with the
> installer might be a good idea, also leading to increased feedback.

One of my design decisions was that the Setup Utilities should be able to do
just that kind of things. It is very easy I believe to package a new version
I believe. The documentation describes how to do that - I hope - if I have
been unclear please ask me.