Re: EmacsW32 invocation options

["Lennart Borgman (gmail)" <lennart.borgman@gmail.com>]

Juanma Barranquero wrote:
> On 5/2/07, Lennart Borgman (gmail) <lennart.borgman@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> I am sorry if I gave the impression that you and others did not take
>> part at all. But when I finally gave Emacs client a (logical) structure
>> that seemed relevant to me I did not get feedback on that.
> 
> You *did* get feedback. Some of that feedback said: "it is too late".
> Some was "I don't agree with your (logical) structure, I think we
> should discuss it a little more". Some of it said "the implementation
> is confusing". There was also "it's not that big of an issue, and we
> don't want to further delay the issue". Some feedback was silence (and
> then Warnock's dilemma apply). Some feedback was positive. You seem to
> talk of non-positive feedback as "no feedback".

It is more that the feedback at that time had to be on a more detailed 
level to be meaningful, at least for me.


>> And I really
>> tested different possibilities a lot.
> 
> I *know* you invested a lot of effort. Why should that mean that the
> answer reached is optimal, or even good?


No, of course not. What I meant was that I perhaps could have added 
something to your view if you had tried to be more concrete at that 
time. (I am not sure I remember the details any more.)

I understood it as both a lack of time on your side and that you thought 
a bit different than I did. That is ok, but it is not my responsibility.