From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dmitry Gutov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Platform independent graphical display for Emacs Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2021 13:57:40 +0200 Message-ID: <2ac64757-b8f7-e60a-4d3d-51aa1a13c812@yandex.ru> References: <87ilvgwfor.fsf@telefonica.net> <83a6grx1o9.fsf@gnu.org> <834k6zwvi1.fsf@gnu.org> <87h7azilmu.fsf@yahoo.com> <87sfujh4a2.fsf@yahoo.com> <877dbuhm6j.fsf@yahoo.com> <87tueyg5gc.fsf@yahoo.com> <83y24asbh4.fsf@gnu.org> <83tuexqh7w.fsf@gnu.org> <9c04ef31-96e0-1874-7385-633435a28b5f@yandex.ru> <83lf08rk27.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="25081"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.13.0 Cc: luangruo@yahoo.com, stefankangas@gmail.com, drew.adams@oracle.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Dec 25 13:00:26 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1n15is-0006JO-ND for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 25 Dec 2021 13:00:26 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57012 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n15iq-0004IJ-IL for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 25 Dec 2021 07:00:24 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:52722) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n15hS-0002vs-SY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Dec 2021 06:58:58 -0500 Original-Received: from [2a00:1450:4864:20::432] (port=36682 helo=mail-wr1-x432.google.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n15hO-0001X7-Bo; Sat, 25 Dec 2021 06:58:58 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-wr1-x432.google.com with SMTP id r17so22119390wrc.3; Sat, 25 Dec 2021 03:58:53 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=sender:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=83DFPfZGUttYwgZb1n9WIuuJvkmToiUIT6qSBloUS54=; b=YYPyJn5o2p3z4NnWkiFhkJgIXnhGihOH3iK+DgZqWc7JN4ARFN9amz9SLEll88G1Jv 9iKd+4goozsPpkrIZjzGIqqqaNiHcuehEMy1S4yusMpZjSpb8wceMkjE7A+WT2R/ZYAK 7KOXF1A9lzizHHN8mntKjeJDv/VTqhfd5pRhFh71ZAYC3BAVMdRvk24PPj6zo79qQ9XV JdxxjUw00Z5mi3SHRxAUi+DyM2ibgzSZ4srXH2i0Z41D/EdFSo12gD+niEAt5HNy4ez7 a0kPs+956G3WVOFsy6SQZfkFPWu2QhcEWtl80KriioPnrpZBsI+yJj29Q5pvkVBxCEPJ FyDQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id :date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=83DFPfZGUttYwgZb1n9WIuuJvkmToiUIT6qSBloUS54=; b=7Y/86GYKA29N1Tx7e8cAePM5ULUFGOFdLlBOot0BH7J/WG7jolhrYGYxvwhPvmB9uk AYxU2cXhTVQb83kiFkeChku3vF67XFUhpAzxG9cTLUcsoKG4y+IHa9n8CRVhMNDUYd3Q pLpbHXC9ujE+nfYsWD7YGX0kPcogqe/41VZt3rIrhB9hQh4gRvIEQbW2JxgxGubDTQ9g uvyITMU+BhkHJtLZGhTotisXJWLMNVswJnusVHJoMo1aPd0LeN0UlOJstkh8d4NnzyCx lo1Hc7YJ2AUNYrPerGT8CTdfQYc2BNsEP6C0rpFktMFWlD50HzLQAMOlQyJWpFo0RXqO q2Ig== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531tRB9wkab8c/EJEvPFGO6Hup9Y/4TBzDrJjvOLtbucSHDsC5jf E0Po5ovSYQITwaFOdS+u+su7GYHTnjM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyLu4XSBS1/8uHFqHpUqq6mOX9b1m9/ykxdeBUgaLQ29mv4P6MA9jazidWoMGGRHPnENIFatw== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:4fc2:: with SMTP id h2mr7091109wrw.262.1640433532424; Sat, 25 Dec 2021 03:58:52 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from [10.112.109.103] ([185.209.196.172]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id d13sm9995093wru.41.2021.12.25.03.58.50 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 25 Dec 2021 03:58:51 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <83lf08rk27.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Language: en-US X-Host-Lookup-Failed: Reverse DNS lookup failed for 2a00:1450:4864:20::432 (failed) Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::432; envelope-from=raaahh@gmail.com; helo=mail-wr1-x432.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -8 X-Spam_score: -0.9 X-Spam_bar: / X-Spam_report: (-0.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.196, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RDNS_NONE=0.793, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:283198 Archived-At: On 25.12.2021 14:38, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Before we could do that, we'd need to have this port functional first, >> and the problem with dropping all others would be in reaching a >> consensus across emacs-devel (at least) that the new one is better than >> the others. And it maintained/maintainable, of course. >> >> That should pretty much guarantee that it will be maintained. But the >> odds of reaching that point are pretty slim, of course, given that we >> don't lack in different viewpoints here. > > So you'd suggest to the OP to develop the software in the hope that > all of the above will happen? And if it doesn't, just agree for the > results to be abandoned? The OP would have to agree to that. I suppose. And I think the BeOS port had been accepted under the same conditions recently. > And I fail to see how that solves the long-term maintenance problem, > once we do accept the code. This happened in the past, more than > once. We should be able to drop unmaintained ports. Even if we're reluctant, in general, to remove features that someone is using. After all, the history of changes is saved, so as soon as a volunteer arrives to resurrect it, they can start with 'git revert' and continue. >>> I have nothing in principle against improving the no-toolkit >>> configuration. I do think that _adding_ another no-toolkit >>> configuration would be undesirable, because it would make the >>> proverbial "spaghetti of Emacs code" even harder to understand and >>> maintain. (I don't think such a suggestion is on the table, but since >>> you seem to say I misunderstood the suggestion, perhaps I've >>> misunderstood that as well.) >> >> I would at least hope that switching to another no-toolkit configuration >> (and removing the current one soon after) is on the table. After getting >> enough consensus, naturally. > > What would be the motivation for such a switch, as opposed to just > incrementally improving the existing no-toolkit build? Come to think > of that, what exactly is the difference between these two > alternatives? In my mind, the new port would, similar to Blender, or VS Code, or IDEA, have their own set of widgets for menus, buttons, tabs, etc, which would remain consistent across platforms and look at least somewhat fresh/modern-ish. And it would support HiDPI scaling. But the details are ultimately up to the developer.