From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Samuel Bronson Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Return Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2010 18:21:32 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87mxojwu15.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87k4jnweng.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> 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 1291764108 15656 80.91.229.12 (7 Dec 2010 23:21:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2010 23:21:48 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: MON KEY Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Dec 08 00:21:41 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 1PQ6qr-0005Dz-0q for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 08 Dec 2010 00:21:41 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35467 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PQ6qq-0006xM-EQ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 07 Dec 2010 18:21:40 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=57809 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PQ6ql-0006x4-HJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Dec 2010 18:21:36 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PQ6qk-0003EN-9F for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Dec 2010 18:21:35 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-fx0-f48.google.com ([209.85.161.48]:48039) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PQ6qk-0003Df-1P for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Dec 2010 18:21:34 -0500 Original-Received: by fxm2 with SMTP id 2so414876fxm.35 for ; Tue, 07 Dec 2010 15:21:32 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=fU19auC9WDlKHSnWIH7pWZZtS/4q4SBEPKBYSFpLemU=; b=sa5oapUaHhIC7VqzzNRmJKX5SPR/cL21H6wGCsRVzmY9Ed4ZG+3NSkdUHfKcwT7UAW eDwML0u7SG046Zgxf++o4oO9u8E9olCcK1q7Yn1OwM7+5DY4MAZE2lwgjVuTg2ZYWk/3 Tr4sVpfmXOYIa71wuq0zyUEioOdEvVKWq9cis= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=s2ADEFgRbvrDHhjWRZrP3X3nT911WiwBLOcUCffXU+QlEVZWb3FupGiCdzyKi/xq97 zuOswjdTQE6Pf3IdBLPzCOBxppYQcVvthcDogs1Q6b0RqAq/Z8oMO3YfI/uN5/ZoVItb Wwgl94fxbL247ZJFs2Ld2iPI1wl8QG1WMQ6BA= Original-Received: by 10.223.72.207 with SMTP id n15mr7686742faj.46.1291764092369; Tue, 07 Dec 2010 15:21:32 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.223.74.137 with HTTP; Tue, 7 Dec 2010 15:21:32 -0800 (PST) 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:133524 Archived-At: On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 9:42 PM, MON KEY wrote: > On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 2:20 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull = wrote: >> MON KEY writes: >> =C2=A0> What would be interesting to learn is whether there is any will = for a formal >> =C2=A0> incorporation of the C in Clisp w/ the E in elisp? >> >> {...} >> Hrvoje Niksic and Martin Buchholz advocated a Common Lisp as the >> appropriate way to evolve elisp, and IIRC Erik Naggum was in that camp >> too. =C2=A0But they've all long since left the development community. > > The slime users/developers are _actively_ incorporating Common Lisp > (of various implementations) with Emacs/Emacs lisp (unfortunately they > have to resort to a different RPC per implementation to do > so). Regardless, the Slime user/devel community is hardly an > insignificant group. I thought they used a common CL-side codebase known as "swank" for all of the Common Lisp implementations, and that something else was only needed when talking with some other kind of Lisp (or a non-Lisp)? > This said, I suspect most of them only actively engage elisp in lieu > of Common Lisp out of necessity not preference. >> =C2=A0> the closed/proprietary control maintained on the FSF Emacs sourc= e >> =C2=A0> tree. >> >> Hardly closed *or* proprietary. > > Tomato/Potato[1] Obviously the meaning here was not precisely "the opposite of Open Source / Free Software", which *is* what those words most often mean when they describe software in these parts, but note that here they describe the *control* over a *particular* source tree, which is a distinctly different thing, though many effects may be similar. (Thankfully, not all: no matter how much of MS's .NET Framework source code may be available for me to (hypothetically) single-step through, I doubt I will ever be permitted to fork it or incorporate it into my own programs beyond trivial-fair-use copy/paste/modify of tiny bits. Not that I use .NET or anything; it's just the only example of a totally proprietary codebase which nevertheless has more-or-less publicly-visible code that I could think of -- where public =3D=3D people with access to Windows systems w/ sufficient free hard drive space to install a recent enough Visual Foo Express Edition (at least, I think it's supposed to work on Express Editions), admittedly.) >> Remember XEmacs in your prayers, and >> rest assured that any work you do on Emacs remains free for others to >> use, whether GNU chooses to distribute it or not. > > No doubt. :) > >> =C2=A0If they choose not, you can always do it yourself, as we do. > > Yes but there is an accord to maintain some mutual consensus. AIUI your > presence on this list is indicative of such an effort no? > To paraphrase JWZ, =C2=A0"Now you have two problems." You mean, maintaining the feature and dealing with the pain that is non-core autoloads? >> But ... I wouldn't bet that you'll have more luck peddling your warez >> at xemacs.org or sxemacs.org for that matter. >> > > I'm not aware of peddling either here or there... what is occurring > here is more akin to carpet-bagging than to commerce in snake-oil. > >> >> That's the nature of a distribution, that somebody decides what to distr= ibute. >> Typically by rejecting your proposals, c'est la vie. :-) > > If there is angst here it is not around the rejection of any > particular proposal (certainly not my own), but rather about the > persistent inability to engage in reasoned/meaningful/intentioned > discussion w/re incorporating of a particular set of Lisp features by > either ignoring and/or dismissing the utility these features do > otherwise provide both Emacs user community and the greater community > of Lisp dialect users despite a general acknowledgment by both of > these communities that the particular set of features are > wanted/needed and FTMP can be reasonably implemented. I seem to recall there being a very significant incident of this that lead to someone forking Emacs ... if only I could remember what the fork was called! > [1] The long term evidence of this inability IMO suggests that the Emacs > project(s) are closed and proprietary project (whether their source be > free or not). That [SX]Emacs does remain reasonably compatible with > GNU Emacs suggest that it too abides this inability (whether tacitly > or otherwise). Compatibility and restriction are two different things. That [S]XEmacs does not incorporate more of the RMS-rejected features probably says more about the development effort available to [S]XEmacs vs. that required to implement/port/submit the features than anything else. Probably, in the case of add-on packages, it does not help that the XEmacs packaging machinery is only intended for use with packages stored in its own CVS tree...