Re: EmacsW32 invocation options

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

Lennart Borgman (gmail) wrote:
> Juanma Barranquero wrote:
>> On 5/4/07, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
>>
>>> (He might be better off choosing a less radical word than
>>> ``destructive'', but then he's not a native English speaker, so we all
>>> might cut him some slack.)
>>
>> I should've said "not productive", but I was mimicking the use of
>> "destructive" in one of Lennart's answers to you.
>>
>>> In this case, Lennart's attitude to put into his distribution every
>>> patch he finds useful, but cannot convince the Emacs developers to
>>> accept, is IMO not the best use of that freedom.  It is confusing to
>>> users who expect Emacs to behave as documented and to do that
>>> consistently on all platforms.  And it's an attitude that smells of
>>> schism and forking, which many of us will not approve, because it
>>> diminishes the already small group of active developers by spreading
>>> their insufficient resources between several competing projects.
>>
>> You've nicely summarized the main points of the discussion. Thanks.
> 
> 
> For those interested here is a list of what patches there are in the 
> patched version of Emacs+EmacsW32:
> 
>   file:///C:/EmacsW32/etc/EmacsW32.html#patchcont


Damn, wrong window ;-)

  http://ourcomments.org/Emacs/EmacsW32.html#unpatched