From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Preview: portable dumper Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2016 17:57:27 +0200 Message-ID: <83fum3lmag.fsf@gnu.org> References: <047a67ec-9e29-7e4e-0fb0-24c3e59b5886@dancol.org> <83zikjxt1j.fsf@gnu.org> <8360n6ruzu.fsf@gnu.org> <834m2nplmb.fsf@gnu.org> <83inr2oje6.fsf@gnu.org> <83bmwuogfb.fsf@gnu.org> <878trydrbo.fsf@red-bean.com> <83a8cem1eq.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1480867057 12991 195.159.176.226 (4 Dec 2016 15:57:37 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2016 15:57:37 +0000 (UTC) Cc: kfogel@red-bean.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Dec 04 16:57:27 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cDZAN-0001xZ-7K for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 04 Dec 2016 16:57:27 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34868 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cDZAR-0001qO-2s for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 04 Dec 2016 10:57:31 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51203) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cDZAJ-0001q8-3x for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 04 Dec 2016 10:57:23 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cDZAF-0003EX-88 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 04 Dec 2016 10:57:23 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:59312) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cDZAF-0003ER-4f; Sun, 04 Dec 2016 10:57:19 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:1765 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1cDZA7-0006Wb-KT; Sun, 04 Dec 2016 10:57:12 -0500 In-reply-to: (message from Richard Stallman on Sat, 03 Dec 2016 16:28:58 -0500) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:210025 Archived-At: > From: Richard Stallman > CC: kfogel@red-bean.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2016 16:28:58 -0500 > > You have explained a possible drawback of the portable dumper: > it could make maintenance more difficult some years from now. > > No one can doubt that this is a possibility. People do disagree about > how much of a problem it is likely to be. Many of us don't expect it > will make a big difference. You forecast that it could. Thank you for acknowledging that this is a possibility. I was under the impression that my opponents didn't agree. > But you've got to admit that it is uncertain. We're all making > guesstimates about probabilities. IMO, dangerous outcomes should be taken seriously even if their probability is low, as long as it's non-zero. "Taken seriously" means we should do something to try to avoid the danger. That is what I'm trying to do: find a solution for the problem that will avoid the danger. > So if we install the portable dumper, please don't treat it as a > certain disaster. The "disaster" is not the installation of the dumper. The disaster I alluded to would be not to try to find a solution that minimizes the above danger. If we have tried our best and failed, then it's not a disaster, it's life: after all, we can only make the best use of the cards we've been dealt.