From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: What a modern collaboration toolkit looks like Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2007 23:57:17 -0800 Message-ID: References: <20071231190034.12b0ed4a@reforged> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1199174279 26895 80.91.229.12 (1 Jan 2008 07:57:59 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2008 07:57:59 +0000 (UTC) To: "Mike Mattie" , Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jan 01 08:58:13 2008 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 1J9c0q-0005zo-QB for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 01 Jan 2008 08:58:13 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J9c0T-0002Fb-Il for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 01 Jan 2008 02:57:50 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1J9c0C-0002En-24 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Jan 2008 02:57:32 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1J9c09-0002E5-Uz for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Jan 2008 02:57:30 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J9c09-0002Do-8o for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Jan 2008 02:57:29 -0500 Original-Received: from mx20.gnu.org ([199.232.41.8]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1J9c08-0003Nv-Mv for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Jan 2008 02:57:28 -0500 Original-Received: from rgminet01.oracle.com ([148.87.113.118]) by mx20.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1J9c07-0007CF-M1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Jan 2008 02:57:27 -0500 Original-Received: from rgmgw2.us.oracle.com (rgmgw2.us.oracle.com [138.1.186.111]) by rgminet01.oracle.com (Switch-3.2.4/Switch-3.1.6) with ESMTP id m017vIZf007151; Tue, 1 Jan 2008 00:57:18 -0700 Original-Received: from acsmt351.oracle.com (acsmt351.oracle.com [141.146.40.151]) by rgmgw2.us.oracle.com (Switch-3.2.4/Switch-3.2.4) with ESMTP id m017tG8N021572; Tue, 1 Jan 2008 00:57:17 -0700 Original-Received: from 141.144.88.42 by acsmt350.oracle.com with ESMTP id 3471321401199174204; Mon, 31 Dec 2007 23:56:44 -0800 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <20071231190034.12b0ed4a@reforged> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= X-Whitelist: TRUE X-Whitelist: TRUE X-detected-kernel: by mx20.gnu.org: Linux 2.4-2.6 X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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:85804 Archived-At: > I have constantly run into what I think is the true issue facing > Emacs, the fact that it is forked almost to death. > > There are three forks of Emacs for Mac OS X, cedet is maintained outside > of the mainline, the Ohio Lisp archive died ages ago, slime is > third party, and icicles distributes through the emacs wiki. I really, really (!) do not want to get involved with this thread. But since you opened a tiny parenthesis by mentioning Icicles, Mike, I'll respond to that. [Inserts foot in door.] There are lots of libraries and code snippets that are distributed on Emacs Wiki. And that's a good thing, not a bad thing. gnu-emacs-sources is also a good place to distribute libraries. Nothing wrong with either. I don't interpret your remark negatively, but as a compliment. But I want to be clear that Icicles and many other libraries that are not distributed as part of Emacs do not constitute forks of Emacs. As far as Icicles is concerned, it is compatible with Emacs 20 through 23. IOW, it is more compatible with Emacs than Emacs is. ;-) There are lots of possible reasons why a given library is not integrated with Emacs and distributed as part of it. The Emacs world is not limited to GNU Emacs, and even the GNU Emacs world is not limited to the code distributed with GNU Emacs. The fact that there are multiple degrees of unity and multiple means of distribution is rather a sign of vitality, IMO, not of decline. Speaking only of Icicles, using it as an example, I will say that though there would be some advantages to having Icicles as part of Emacs, there would be some disadvantages also. Since it is separate, I am the only author, and the user base is relatively small, who cares? I am free to take it where I like, which means I can shape it in any weird way I might dream up. IOW, Icicles has the benefit of being a lab, and I have the privilege of playing mad scientist. Don't get me wrong, I try to respond to users, as you know, but it's not the same sort of sober commitment that Emacs development offers. To me, Emacs is a game, not just a tool to get a job done. I don't even use Emacs for anything anymore - just for farting around with Emacs Lisp, an end in itself, a job I never want to get done. The plus side of this state of affairs is that Icicles can serve as a set of UI experiments - a late night snack for thought. The minus side is that if you get addicted to using it you might want to save a copy of today's version because tomorrow's might be too far out there for your taste ;-). Ya never know. And you have only one developer to deal with, which also has its pros and cons. I would say that (1) it is generally good that Emacs developers take the integrity of the Emacs code base seriously, and (2) there is also room for Emacs development outside the innermost tent. When it comes to things I would like to see changed in Emacs, I sometimes find (nameless) Emacs developers too close-minded and tight-assed. I tell myself that they lack imagination. But when it comes to things that I don't want to see changed in Emacs, I can find the same developers too loosey-goosey and wish they'd stop messing it up arbitrarily. Taken together, and given that I am only one consumer of Emacs, those opposite judgments probably indicate that the developers are not too far off track on average. ;-) So consider this my toast to the New Year - here's to Emacs! Nah, not to you guys - Emacs is more than any of us, RMS included. Emacs has a life of its own. Offspring are like that. And I'd be willing to bet that it will have a very long life. My guess is that Emacs will outlive the future daughter of the youngest gadget-&-gamesick, pimply and ircsome recruit that any pied-piper pledge drive might bring under its spell. Nothing wrong with cross-fertilization, new blood, new tools, and new means of discussion, development, and distribution. All of that wake-up-and-smell-the-coffee pep-talk stuff is about us and GNU Emacs as a project, however; it's not so much about Emacs. Emacs dead or declining? Nah. 40 years from now, in another cocktail soiree, someone will still be prancing on about how dull, old-fashioned, and decrepit Emacs is, and everyone there will nod and agree and wonder how and why it still keeps dragging its sorry, tres depassee ass along. Why doesn't someone put the damn thing out of its misery? But Ol' Man Emacs, dat Ol' Man Emacs, he mus' know sumpin', but don' say nothin'; he jes' keeps rollin', he keeps on rollin' along...