Re: MPS and pgtk

[Po Lu <luangruo@yahoo.com>]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

> Which is bothersome, at least from the Emacs POV, since Wayland and
> PGTK have so many limitations, restrictions, and misfeatures which
> effectively disable useful Emacs features.
>
>> So, IMHO the pgtk support may be prioritized as it is the only way we
>> support Wayland natively.
>> 
>> Not sure if there are plans or alternatives under consideration to
>> change/improve pgtk, but if igc becomes an issue for it... we may
>> rethink if we really want it looking to the future?
>
> Given the sorry state of Wayland and GTK support of what Emacs needs,
> from my POV the PGTK configuration becomes less and less relevant to
> Emacs.  I'm aware that the world moves in the opposite direction, but
> unless we get some help from Wayland/GTK developers, or,
> alternatively, find ways to work around those limitations (unlikely,
> IMNSHO), there's nothing we can do about this, and nothing we could
> gain by "rethinking".  If you care about these platforms, start
> lobbying the respective development teams to cater more for Emacs and
> its needs.
>
> Sorry.

The silver lining is that I very much doubt PGTK will pose special
difficulties for MPS support.