From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ted Zlatanov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Wherein I argue for the inclusion of libnettle in Emacs 24.5 Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2014 15:11:37 -0500 Organization: =?utf-8?B?0KLQtdC+0LTQvtGAINCX0LvQsNGC0LDQvdC+0LI=?= @ Cienfuegos Message-ID: <87a9e6eiyu.fsf@lifelogs.com> References: <87ha8f3jt1.fsf@building.gnus.org> <87wqhbdnwc.fsf@lifelogs.com> <52F114E7.9000805@cs.ucla.edu> <87iosuenjq.fsf@lifelogs.com> <52F139D3.3030401@cs.ucla.edu> Reply-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1391544718 1954 80.91.229.3 (4 Feb 2014 20:11:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 20:11:58 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Feb 04 21:12:06 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WAmLk-0008LQ-SK for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 04 Feb 2014 21:12:04 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:54748 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WAmLk-0006vU-C8 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 04 Feb 2014 15:12:04 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:52371) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WAmLc-0006rf-K1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 04 Feb 2014 15:12:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WAmLX-0006A5-96 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 04 Feb 2014 15:11:56 -0500 Original-Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:60295) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WAmLX-0006A0-2a for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 04 Feb 2014 15:11:51 -0500 Original-Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WAmLU-0008C9-DZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 04 Feb 2014 21:11:48 +0100 Original-Received: from c-98-229-61-72.hsd1.ma.comcast.net ([98.229.61.72]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 04 Feb 2014 21:11:48 +0100 Original-Received: from tzz by c-98-229-61-72.hsd1.ma.comcast.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 04 Feb 2014 21:11:48 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Mail-Followup-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-Lines: 31 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: c-98-229-61-72.hsd1.ma.comcast.net X-Face: bd.DQ~'29fIs`T_%O%C\g%6jW)yi[zuz6; d4V0`@y-~$#3P_Ng{@m+e4o<4P'#(_GJQ%TT= D}[Ep*b!\e,fBZ'j_+#"Ps?s2!4H2-Y"sx" Mail-Copies-To: never User-Agent: Gnus/5.130008 (Ma Gnus v0.8) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:ti4sQUoq21AlhKAxHYdnfX4B+zg= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 80.91.229.3 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:169393 Archived-At: On Tue, 04 Feb 2014 11:04:51 -0800 Paul Eggert wrote: PE> On 02/04/2014 10:32 AM, Ted Zlatanov wrote: PE> Using the GnuTLS API would remove Stefan's objection to the change, PE> no? Emacs already depends on the GnuTLS API. >> >> No, sadly, because it's new C glue code and his goal is to remove such. PE> As I understand it his objection is to adding dependencies on new PE> libraries, not to more-effectively using libraries that Emacs already PE> depends on. For example, he didn't object to adding PE> internal-default-process-filter or to bool-vector-count-population, PE> even though these functions both involved new C glue code. Well, here's the rejection letter: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/163980 As I said then, feel free to add your vote of support. So far Lars and I are the only ones asking for encryption that doesn't require calling out to external binaries like GnuPG. I followed up to Lars specifically so I could explain that I thought (after a few months of letting things rest) that loose coupling of *encryption* features specifically was a bad idea. Compared to, say, XML parsing, encryption is much less of a feature and more of an integral facility. I respect and understand Stefan's opinion and have not argued about the FFI in general (in fact I was planning to work on it; it's a neat feature), but I think Lars makes good points against FFI from practical experience, and I think my point above is worth considering as well. Ted