From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Juanma Barranquero Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Efforts to attract more users? Date: Sun, 11 Jul 2010 04:56:51 +0200 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1278817046 9557 80.91.229.12 (11 Jul 2010 02:57:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 11 Jul 2010 02:57:26 +0000 (UTC) Cc: "fplemma@gmail.com" , "emacs-devel@gnu.org" , "rms@gnu.org" , "joakim@verona.se" , christian.lynbech@tieto.com To: Lennart Borgman Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Jul 11 04:57:23 2010 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 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OXmjL-0005YB-Fv for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 11 Jul 2010 04:57:23 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51750 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OXmjK-0007wj-T8 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 10 Jul 2010 22:57:22 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=45607 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OXmjB-0007vZ-R9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Jul 2010 22:57:15 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OXmjA-00083h-Ic for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Jul 2010 22:57:13 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-fx0-f41.google.com ([209.85.161.41]:51870) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OXmjA-00083Q-EE; Sat, 10 Jul 2010 22:57:12 -0400 Original-Received: by fxm20 with SMTP id 20so1956633fxm.0 for ; Sat, 10 Jul 2010 19:57:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:mime-version:received:in-reply-to :references:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=rewQJS9OaZoATyaFLD81CrjxnK0Zo0ZQSjnBavughXk=; b=c7wdHOvWQodjP3rp+0TtqaDwNuG1MG7F/M9MagNtbGtHzzE/knBmMs/PEDCzaZLPdz Dapy1qZCLy4IEjiVJ5Gd68240VrIHZOrY1bxUAr3OnclJYT75bJfiYop9UJ61C07Ol5D T2mEyhBkeZeBfujNbQLnaUPREt+cfm3ILc9GM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=FGyJ9RNHLx3JiUbypCCJncRbn0fORb/RgELdRCdqszmygr7ThF3zTlhsr0OQYGUk24 7EERWX0WztJkdQGhWROFmrmnhIZy96akQi5WMESPqA0CsZTZPqxpyUtmcMCjeNU5iFIr rZ4ALZKGbD5ynq8w0Ohp9FBfLLKWBolqP4zBY= Original-Received: by 10.239.190.141 with SMTP id x13mr560167hbh.54.1278817031237; Sat, 10 Jul 2010 19:57:11 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.239.185.10 with HTTP; Sat, 10 Jul 2010 19:56:51 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) 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:127026 Archived-At: On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 04:40, Lennart Borgman wrote: > We both wanted to make the merge. I suggested to make it stepwise by > changing the function arguments the way I needed them for the new > structure. It would have made the burden of merging easier, but I was > not able to convince you of that. =C2=A0To still make it a bit easier I > restructured the code so that a similar implementation could be used > on all platform. I got no feedback on that either. Obviously we remember it quite differently. Let's drop the issue. > Maybe the big problem was that I did not commit this myself. Only if trying to reach consensus is seen as a big problem... > Just that this type of cooperation means much more > work. Much more work than what? You're basically saying that you can't be bothered to spend time discussing changes, so the answers you see are, either other people spends the time, or you commit the changes even if you suspect they wouldn't likely be accepted as is, or in some cases you know they are actively opposed. > I do not really care how. I just realize our > efforts so far have been unsuccessful. I'm glad to see you put it that way, because in most previous ocassions (including the one that triggered my intervention here) you said that you had patch X or Y but the developers weren't interested on them... > Really? Did you read my explanation then? (It is not important to me, > but still I get irritated if the bug I was looking at gets ignored > because of misunderstandings.) Misunderstanding is the operating word here. After a while, I find your posts in some given thread harder and harder to follow. =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Juanma