From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Is it planned to remove xemacs compatibility code? Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 23:00:02 +0200 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <87d5z5wau8.fsf@vh213602.truman.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1098824452 23551 80.91.229.6 (26 Oct 2004 21:00:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 21:00:52 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Stefan Monnier , emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Oct 26 23:00:42 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1CMYQr-0004M3-00 for ; Tue, 26 Oct 2004 23:00:41 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CMYYZ-0005Sq-UQ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 26 Oct 2004 17:08:39 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CMYYN-0005Qj-1p for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 26 Oct 2004 17:08:27 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CMYYL-0005PS-8V for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 26 Oct 2004 17:08:25 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CMYYL-0005P7-3D for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 26 Oct 2004 17:08:25 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CMYQX-0008LY-Ug for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 26 Oct 2004 17:00:22 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lola.goethe.zz) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CMYPi-0005qV-8F; Tue, 26 Oct 2004 16:59:35 -0400 Original-To: belanger@truman.edu In-Reply-To: <87d5z5wau8.fsf@vh213602.truman.edu> (Jay Belanger's message of "Tue, 26 Oct 2004 14:14:39 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/21.3.50 (gnu/linux) 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: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:28994 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:28994 Jay Belanger writes: > Stefan Monnier writes: > >>> Around Emacs code, I find many Xemacs compatibility code as >>> (cond ((featurep 'xemacs) blah ...) >>> (if (featurep 'xemacs) blah ...) >> >> Those files are typically also distributed separately from Emacs >> for older Emacsen or for XEmacs, so it is better to keep this code >> so as to minimize the difference between the version bundled with >> Emacs and the other version: any difference tends to lead to >> problems keeping the files in sync. > > What about the files that aren't distributed separately? As long as we don't get big amounts of unmaintable cruft and as long as there is some reasonable chance that the code will help the XEmacs developers catch up with it, I'd leave it in. If one thinks that the stuff is falling into bit rot anyway, it may be an idea to ask on the xemacs-devel@xemacs.org whether somebody there volunteers to actively keep it working inside of the Emacs CVS (requires copyright assignment). If not, it is probably saner to just pull it instead of giving the XEmacs crowd something that only pretends to work with XEmacs. > Also, the manuals of some bundled packages have installation > instructions; should these be kept? As long as we are maintaining the manuals separately, I don't see any point in including either installation instructions for Emacs or XEmacs, if the respective version of the package is already installed with Emacs. If there is no manual available outside of the Emacs CVS, this is probably a situation that is a bit unfortunate. Again, I'd then ask on the XEmacs list whether somebody wants to maintain the respective section (which can probably be removed by conditional compilation) here, and pull it only if nobody can be found willing to maintain those parts. Keeping possibly outdated and incorrect documentation around will help nobody. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum