Re: Questions regarding PGTK, high-dpi font-rendering, new X11-Warning

[xenodasein--- via "Emacs development discussions." <emacs-devel@gnu.org>]

I will try to answer the left out parts in a different mail.


Nov 30, 2022, 13:37 by luangruo@yahoo.com:

> xenodasein@tutanota.de writes:
>
>> First of all thank you for not going straight for it's not possible /
>> no one would want that / it's the wrong way / etc.
>>
>
> I only say that when it really is impossible, or wrong.  I see nothing
> wrong in principle with making the PGTK build work well on X, but
> whoever tries is in for a lot of pain, so I'm not volunteering.
>

This kind of belief in infallibility will make others less willing to
want to work with you if they don't have to.


>> You must keep in mind that big contributions like this must have a
>> foundation if there will be any hope of them even happening.
>>
>
> ``this'' being?
>

Having a single binary thing, or having own renderer.


>> I remember Eli requesting not to change the location of some function
>> on the grounds that it will now be harder to find where it is.
>>
>
> Which is bad because..?
>

I don't think it is worth for anyone to try to explain that as choices
are made, and apparent from the way you are asking that there is no
interest to reconsider anything.


>> So what is my point, when some person asks why do I need to binaries,
>> instead of saying things like "why not" say we need more people to
>> work with C parts, that's all.
>>
>
> What's the verb ``binaries''?
>

Meant to say "two binaries" pointing to Björn's complaint, in this
thread.