From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: copyrights to be fixed Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 11:21:39 +0100 Message-ID: <85hcttkn9o.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> References: <200702090136.25838.pogonyshev@gmx.net> <86irebhkgg.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> <87r6szr7c7.fsf@pacem.orebokech.com> <200702110930.l1B9UIcg006475@oogie-boogie.ics.uci.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1171189331 20258 80.91.229.12 (11 Feb 2007 10:22:11 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 10:22:11 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org, Stefan Monnier To: Dan Nicolaescu Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Feb 11 11:22:00 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HGBqI-0005Eo-DB for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 11 Feb 2007 11:21:58 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HGBqH-0006d5-Rg for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 11 Feb 2007 05:21:57 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HGBq5-0006b7-VM for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 11 Feb 2007 05:21:46 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HGBq4-0006Yp-8l for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 11 Feb 2007 05:21:45 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HGBq3-0006Y4-Lh for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 11 Feb 2007 05:21:43 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-in-12.arcor-online.net ([151.189.21.52]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA:32) (Exim 4.52) id 1HGBq2-00050A-5J; Sun, 11 Feb 2007 05:21:42 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-in-01-z2.arcor-online.net (mail-in-10-z2.arcor-online.net [151.189.8.27]) by mail-in-12.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 692544C858; Sun, 11 Feb 2007 11:21:40 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from mail-in-10.arcor-online.net (mail-in-10.arcor-online.net [151.189.21.50]) by mail-in-01-z2.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CF5523D2D9; Sun, 11 Feb 2007 11:21:40 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from lola.goethe.zz (dslb-084-061-029-193.pools.arcor-ip.net [84.61.29.193]) by mail-in-10.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D6DF2351A3; Sun, 11 Feb 2007 11:21:40 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: by lola.goethe.zz (Postfix, from userid 1002) id A9C591C001AC; Sun, 11 Feb 2007 11:21:39 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <200702110930.l1B9UIcg006475@oogie-boogie.ics.uci.edu> (Dan Nicolaescu's message of "Sun\, 11 Feb 2007 01\:30\:14 -0800") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.93 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.4-2.6 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: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:66255 Archived-At: Dan Nicolaescu writes: > Richard Stallman writes: > > > How well does the multi-tty branch actually work? > > I have used emacs from the multi-tty branch for at least 2 years > almost exclusively. I connect/disconnect X11 and tty frames to the > same emacs instance all the time.=20 > > > Are there major gaps in the features? > > AFAIK the main missing thing is that the Windows and Mac ports > probably don't even compile, they have not been kept up to date with > the rest of the changes. It shouldn't be too hard for someone that > knows those platforms to fix this. Well, from what L=C5=91rentey wrote, it would seem like these architecture problems are pretty much constrained to "simple changes" and most likely constrained to few files. Since the multi-tty branch currently has no really active maintainer but is considered robust, it would probably be the safest strategy to merge it first to HEAD, iron out the platform specific problems, only _then_ merge the unicode branch. In that way, the multi-tty branch merge requires less work and its success can be estimated better on the various platforms. While this shifts a good part of the merge load to the unicode branch merge, we have more expertise available there. Since the overlap between the branches should also be not too high, I think that should be doable. --=20 David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum