From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: SVG support in Emacs: what happened? Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2007 23:48:19 +0000 Message-ID: <1169250499.5404.21.camel@galahad> References: <1169200808.6510.7.camel@galahad> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1169250536 2538 80.91.229.12 (19 Jan 2007 23:48:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2007 23:48:56 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Paul Pogonyshev , emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jan 20 00:48:54 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1H83TR-0003GP-5R for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 20 Jan 2007 00:48:45 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1H83TQ-0008A6-Ko for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 19 Jan 2007 18:48:44 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1H83TE-00084U-KI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 19 Jan 2007 18:48:32 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1H83TC-000825-Rc for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 19 Jan 2007 18:48:32 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1H83TC-000822-Ln for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 19 Jan 2007 18:48:30 -0500 Original-Received: from [66.249.92.169] (helo=ug-out-1314.google.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1H83TC-0003o8-5W for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 19 Jan 2007 18:48:30 -0500 Original-Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id j3so655507ugf for ; Fri, 19 Jan 2007 15:48:29 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=beta; h=received:subject:from:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:content-type:date:message-id:mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding; b=ZU3+805fvX/lm5Umwk8Xq4EiihLTeki7zWMK1LE51Sq5Ezb11J7Cp94V7p3TVshDhkbAccY5kZ1qJIPVwU7I/Bo+eqkdEhObN6i2lRe6fOBel09+s92EdnL7ISTlh7xOZS9nrd4nWAFWZ5oxPyC2RSLced2/30HH9Nd/GG9u51U= Original-Received: by 10.66.248.5 with SMTP id v5mr3914958ugh.1169250508080; Fri, 19 Jan 2007 15:48:28 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from ?192.168.0.4? ( [91.84.42.225]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id j33sm2765248ugc.2007.01.19.15.48.27; Fri, 19 Jan 2007 15:48:27 -0800 (PST) Original-To: rms@gnu.org In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Evolution 2.8.1 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:65312 Archived-At: Richard Stallman wrote: > It sounds like you're saying this code is not well written. > Is that what you mean? Ah. No. I'm very sorry if that sounded like my personal judgement on the code, especially as I wouldn't even claim the expertise to make such a judgement. My use of the adjective "hacky" was just an attempt to summarize how the original author (Paul Pogonyshev) described the code: "Here is the first shot. It is extremely non-portable, hackish and ugly, but it works!" At the time, you wrote "I don't have time to read the code": http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2004-09/msg00903.html So I didn't have anything else to go on other than Paul's own verdict. Many apologies to Paul if he likewise assumed I was taking it upon myself to criticize his code. > 2. If it is well written, we could add it (after the release), if we > get legal papers from the authors. I asked if there was "some fundamental roadblock against patching current Emacs CVS with something like this code". Paul just said he sees no obstacle. Back in 2004, Paul said: "I may be willing to have a try [at creating a patch], provided that 'librsvg' usage is acceptable." As far as I can tell from your comments in the original thread, librsvg usage /is/ acceptable. If that's so, the remaining questions are: 1. What does the code need to make it "portable"? 2. What makes it "ugly", other than non-portability? 3. Is Paul (or anyone else) (in 2007) "willing to have a try" at turning it from a "first shot" into a final patch? -- Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis