From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=93scar_Fuentes?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Development Speed Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2021 11:38:43 +0100 Message-ID: <87o858yle4.fsf@telefonica.net> References: <87sfulx86y.fsf@telefonica.net> <87zgotos6d.fsf@yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="34500"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (gnu/linux) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:zPALJntX9RzS67zjD9u3KabuCFc= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Dec 22 11:39:31 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 1mzz1v-0008rt-As for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 11:39:31 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50390 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mzz1t-00032t-Qc for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 05:39:29 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:60902) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mzz1H-0002Nb-6r for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 05:38:51 -0500 Original-Received: from ciao.gmane.io ([116.202.254.214]:59924) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mzz1F-0005Q0-KY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 05:38:50 -0500 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.io with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mzz1D-00084k-3o for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 11:38:47 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Received-SPF: pass client-ip=116.202.254.214; envelope-from=ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; helo=ciao.gmane.io X-Spam_score_int: -15 X-Spam_score: -1.6 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.6 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, 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:282705 Archived-At: Po Lu writes: >> Have we checked lately if those machines that we purport to support are >> able to run anything more complex than `emacs -Q'? > > Yes. For example, I tried quite a few things with the MS-DOS port, and > thanks to that, it works on Emacs 28 now. > > The same situation exists with Windows 9x. At work, we have a 9x system > for running legacy applications, and having Emacs 27 installed on that > system is really convenient. And yes, that Emacs installation is > regularly used. How much RAM that machine has? Do you think it is justified to keep Windows-9X support on Emacs for just a few anecdotal uses? If your answer is that the extra work it adds is negligible and that you will keep the maintenance burden, don't you think that keeping a separate branch for Windows-9X (or any retro-computing platform, for that matter) would be more adequate, instead of forcing everyone else to go over that code when they read the sources?