From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Current state of python.el in the Emacs trunk Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 11:10:20 +0900 Message-ID: <87mxlqnnn7.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> References: <4D40F55C.2040400@gmail.com> <874o85t61z.fsf@liv.ac.uk> <87y65hukcj.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87r5b2kyag.fsf@liv.ac.uk> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1298254089 17284 80.91.229.12 (21 Feb 2011 02:08:09 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 02:08:09 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Christoph , Chong Yidong , Stefan Monnier , "emacs-devel@gnu.org" To: Dave Love Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Feb 21 03:08:04 2011 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 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PrLBy-0002iu-Fo for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 21 Feb 2011 03:08:03 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:42213 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PrLBx-0005CS-1c for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 20 Feb 2011 21:08:01 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=53112 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PrLBq-0005Bf-5H for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 20 Feb 2011 21:07:55 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PrLBm-0007NK-Ql for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 20 Feb 2011 21:07:52 -0500 Original-Received: from mgmt2.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp ([130.158.97.224]:48942) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PrLBm-0007CX-Ek; Sun, 20 Feb 2011 21:07:50 -0500 Original-Received: from uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp [130.158.99.156]) by mgmt2.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DEB09706B0; Mon, 21 Feb 2011 11:07:42 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B09431A2884; Mon, 21 Feb 2011 11:10:20 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: <87r5b2kyag.fsf@liv.ac.uk> X-Mailer: VM 8.1.93a under 21.5 (beta29) "garbanzo" ed3b274cc037 XEmacs Lucid (x86_64-unknown-linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 130.158.97.224 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:136310 Archived-At: Dave Love writes: > Why? python.el was intentionally different from python-mode.el for > various reasons, like being a well-behaved Emacs (as opposed to XEmacs?) > mode. The people working on python-mode do seem to prefer XEmacs to a certain extent, so I can understand why you might write something like that, but I assure it's not very well-behaved by XEmacs standards, either. We do tend to be more lenient in those matters if somebody volunteers to do the maintainance, though, unless it visibly impacts other code.