From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs vista build failures Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 18:08:05 +0200 Message-ID: <85zlo6vtei.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> References: <87ej5oz4pb.fsf@saeurebad.de> <87vdyzxype.fsf@saeurebad.de> <871w1njq32.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <87iquzxgtk.fsf@saeurebad.de> <4884CFEF.8040404@gmail.com> <48861A51.1090401@gmail.com> <20080724080727.GA3448@muc.de> <863alzd1mi.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> <857ibayq3q.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <4889EC71.9050906@gmail.com> <85r69ix9c9.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <4889F760.30009@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1217002286 15325 80.91.229.12 (25 Jul 2008 16:11:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 16:11:26 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Lennart Borgman \(gmail\)" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jul 25 18:12:15 2008 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 1KMPtk-0003Lz-49 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 25 Jul 2008 18:12:04 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48066 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KMPsq-00035h-CJ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 25 Jul 2008 12:11:08 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KMPq6-0001gi-G1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 25 Jul 2008 12:08:18 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KMPq4-0001f6-Pd for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 25 Jul 2008 12:08:18 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=51447 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KMPq4-0001er-Jt for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 25 Jul 2008 12:08:16 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-in-09.arcor-online.net ([151.189.21.49]:46706) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KMPpv-0006An-SN; Fri, 25 Jul 2008 12:08:08 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-in-14-z2.arcor-online.net (mail-in-14-z2.arcor-online.net [151.189.8.31]) by mail-in-09.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C6293027ED; Fri, 25 Jul 2008 18:08:06 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from mail-in-16.arcor-online.net (mail-in-16.arcor-online.net [151.189.21.56]) by mail-in-14-z2.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4ED3D100FC; Fri, 25 Jul 2008 18:08:06 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from lola.goethe.zz (dslb-084-061-005-083.pools.arcor-ip.net [84.61.5.83]) by mail-in-16.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FCEF236E4B; Fri, 25 Jul 2008 18:08:06 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: by lola.goethe.zz (Postfix, from userid 1002) id 867891CD01E2; Fri, 25 Jul 2008 18:08:05 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <4889F760.30009@gmail.com> (Lennart Borgman's message of "Fri, 25 Jul 2008 17:55:12 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.93.3/7826/Fri Jul 25 14:51:06 2008 on mail-in-16.arcor-online.net X-Virus-Status: Clean X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.4-2.6 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:101473 Archived-At: "Lennart Borgman (gmail)" writes: > David Kastrup wrote: >>>>> Are you saying that my hacking on the Windows Emacs doesn't benefit >>>>> others, including Emacs on other platforms? >>>> You don't have time left for getting Emacs-Bidi to run on any platform, >>>> right? Now it is, of course, your choice what to spend your developer >>>> time on, like it is everybody other's choice, too. >>> Maybe the easiest way to give Eli more time for that is give good >>> support for needed tools on w32? >> >> That sounds suspiciously like "throwing good time after bad time", to >> borrow a management term. It really sounds like a bottomless pit: you >> can throw more and more time that way, and the results will be more and >> more tasks. > > I am surprised, David. Where are your arguments? Huh? Your proposal is that "maybe the easiest way" to give developers diverted by w32 more time is by diverting more developers to w32 on more general tasks. And then probably those will get more time by diverting even more developers on even broader w32 tasks. That's not an argument. It is an observation. You suggest the easiest way to invest less time on w32 is to invest more time. And I don't buy it. That's all. Whether you think this is an argument or not is not important to me. >>> 2) The other reason I guess is important is attitude. If a lot of >>> people with good reputation says that working on w32 is not that >>> important then those with a more admiring mind might agree without >>> really diving into the subject. That shows up in code quality later. >> >> I don't see a problem. If people spend the time on other things than >> w32 support, then it is likely better invested. > > Why are you just guessing? You wrote "I guess", not me. >> Keeping this compatibility in mind means aiming for abstractions and >> modularization and APIs which generate whole new subsystems and lots >> of independent fragilities. At each particular point of coding, the >> compatibility costs may be tolerable. But they add up. > > The Mozilla folks have done it. And there has been no cost doing it? >> So in addition to the time sink for the proprietary system developers >> themselves, our compatibility layers add cruft complicating things >> for everyone. I am not convinced that this offsets the advantages. > > It is exactly this attitude I think is a problem. There is not only > costs there are also benefits. What about "offsets the advantages" did you not understand, except that I got it backwards, namely that it should read "I am not convinced that the advantages offset the complications"? > As long as you do not consider the benefits your arguments are valid - > and you will win the debate. But that victory has a cost. Huh? This is not a competition. It is also not an election or decision forming process. If arguments of mine are valid, there is neither a necessity to shoot them down, nor is there one to shoot others down. We are not in a process of choosing which direction we want to put blinders on. > What would it take to convince you? There is nothing to be gained by convincing me. In particular since: >> Again: I am mostly talk and little work, and so I am hardly in a >> position to admonish anybody. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum