The Aquamacs fork (was Re: merging Emacs.app)

[Dan Nicolaescu <dann@ics.uci.edu>]

David Reitter <david.reitter@gmail.com> writes:

  > On 8 Mar 2008, at 18:34, Dan Nicolaescu wrote:
  > >>
  > >> In almost all cases, it is me (and really only me) reproducing and
  > >> tracing these bugs before or after reporting them.  If you prefer me
  > >> to ignore and swallow those user's bug reports,
  > >
  > > We prefer to hear about bugs in emacs-22.1, EMACS_22_BASE, and CVS
  > > HEAD,
  > > so it is better to reproduces the bugs on one of those versions using
  > > emacs -Q, and then report it here.
  > 
  > Sure, that's what I usually do. However, occasionally I can't
  > reproduce or even understand reports without the right knowledge.
  > There, collaboration is needed in the sense that some experts need to
  > give the right hint, as was just the case for this C++ mode bug.  This
  > kind of collaboration has worked arguably well for everyone involved
  > since 2005, and we have squashed a number of bugs in the Emacs 22 code
  > base (not in Aquamacs) this way.  So, I see no need to change the
  > modus operandi at this point.
  > 
  > PS.: Yes, the projects compete in some ways, and they collaborate in
  > others.  The publicity reflects that.

You seem to be arguing that forking Emacs is a good idea (and that is
what Aquamacs effectively is a fork).  You won't find many people (if
any) here agreeing with that.  And the fact that no significant attempt
has been made until now to merge features from Aquamacs to Emacs.

It is your right under GPL to fork, but that does not mean it is the
best thing to do.
It is much better to cooperate and try to add features specific to the
MacOS port back to Emacs.  This is what has made Emacs successful until
now, hundreds of people working on hundreds of different types of
machines and OSes have all added features.