From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?B?R8O2a3R1xJ8=?= Kayaalp Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Changes for emacs 28 Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2020 19:38:50 +0300 Message-ID: <87sgblskbp.fsf@gkayaalp.com> References: <875z8k4wv8.fsf@posteo.net> <83pn6shjni.fsf@gnu.org> <20200911074445.GB5194@tuxteam.de> <87zh5uqdqm.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <20200913103046.GC14385@tuxteam.de> <87y2lerlhl.fsf@gkayaalp.com> <20200913125332.fnt5sbnrfkgt4qyi@Ergus> <87v9ghson6.fsf@gkayaalp.com> <20200913161758.2xem4mxqnhhotqmq@Ergus> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="20401"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: mu4e 1.2.0; emacs 28.0.50 Cc: =?utf-8?B?R8O2a3R1xJ8=?= Kayaalp , emacs-devel@gnu.org, Juri Linkov To: Ergus Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Sep 13 18:40:42 2020 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 1kHV3Q-00056H-SI for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 13 Sep 2020 18:40:40 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:37590 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kHV3P-0002Hn-Sj for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 13 Sep 2020 12:40:39 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:60176) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kHV1m-0000ZD-CG for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 13 Sep 2020 12:38:58 -0400 Original-Received: from relay6-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.198]:40319) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kHV1j-0005L6-WD for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 13 Sep 2020 12:38:58 -0400 X-Originating-IP: 31.177.204.112 Original-Received: from localhost (unknown [31.177.204.112]) (Authenticated sender: self@gkayaalp.com) by relay6-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5BC23C0002; Sun, 13 Sep 2020 16:38:52 +0000 (UTC) In-reply-to: <20200913161758.2xem4mxqnhhotqmq@Ergus> Received-SPF: none client-ip=217.70.183.198; envelope-from=self@gkayaalp.com; helo=relay6-d.mail.gandi.net X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/09/13 12:38:53 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 3.11 and newer [fuzzy] X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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:255522 Archived-At: On 2020-09-13 19:17 +03, Ergus wrote: > Agree. But many times they need to reinvent the wheel and duplicate > efforts to add things unavailable and claimed in vanilla (there are many > examples of unneeded duplication in melpa with almost no differences > between them.) That=E2=80=99s not a net negative. Similar packages cater to similar but different needs. By that logic why have different text editors one ed(1) can handle all text editing? If you don=E2=80=99t think about it in competitive and/or corporate terms, coexistence of similar but different projects is a net positive for any use case because people=E2=80=99s needs are similar but different. > Sometimes maybe, but in general... Why emacs may not? B a c k w a r d s c o m p a t i b i l i t y . > Sorry, I should have added: compared to emacs ;p Doesn=E2=80=99t change much. Many of the editors we=E2=80=99re talking abo= ut are as good and as capable as Emacs. > The difference is that vanilla is not a kernel not a "distro" but both. > > The number of kernel developers is relatively big and the number of > GNU/Linux distros is huge, so they come and go without affecting the > kernel at all. There are also some companies implied to support the > kernel in different ways and of course the sort of "monopoly" the kernel > has in some fields like HPC and IOT. > > While in our case emacs vanilla IS the distro, with many alternatives > around and a small set of developers doing their best. > > So in case of a comparison, maybe openBSD is a more realistic > parallelism... and to compare with a distro you should look at spacemacs > or equivalents. If a distro disappears there are others coming, but if > the kernel disappears (or die) then also the distros will. I don=E2=80=99t get what this is supposed to mean. Emacs has lived on with= way smaller popularity and a smaller number of core developers for decades. And the main roadblock there is the C core, not anything else. There are efforts like Remacs and Guile-Emacs, which are relevant in that space. > I agree there, but not every piece of code is emacs. Otherwise we won't > have a music player, eww, mail client, terminal and gui interface, > dired and so on. > > We can't expect to do the same than a specialized program (unless we > try). But text editing es something that almost everyone does so almost > everyone needs a text editor. You=E2=80=99d be surprised. The majority of computer users mainly use phon= es and the majority of users don=E2=80=99t even know what plain text is, let a= lone editing is. You=E2=80=99d be surprised how hard it is to explain the conce= pt of plain text to people. We=E2=80=99re a niche within a niche within a niche. -- =C4=B0. G=C3=B6ktu=C4=9F Kayaalp / @cadadr / pgp: 024C 30DD 597D 142B 49AC 40EB 465C D949 B101 2427