Re: emacs.app_9.0pre2-1_i386.changes REJECTED

Re: emacs.app_9.0pre2-1_i386.changes REJECTED

[Gürkan Sengün]

Hello,

Adrian Robert has been working hard on the Emacs.app port for systems with
AppKit and FoundationKit:
http://emacs-app.sourceforge.net/

For the curious and history:
1992 18.x http://www.linuks.mine.nu/openstep/emacs.png
2005 23.x http://gnu.ethz.ch/emacs.app.png

I am working on a Debian package and a http://livecd.gnustep.org to
get this graphical version of emacs.

Any help/suggestions on getting this into emacs mainstream source is welcome.
Please read the following mails for details.

Debian Emacs developers: i fully agree with Jörg here. is there any plans
for emacs 23.x based packages? how to split/where to put the stuff that
doesn't need be built for an arch?

It will be so great to have Emacs.app (with GNUstep) on Windows one day:
http://www.phys.ethz.ch/~sengun/GNUstep.Win.Gorm.gif

Cheers,
Gürkan

>> Hi Adrian,
>> 
>> for your info for now... I will keep on working on the packaging...
>> 
>> did you ever talk to the gnu emacs guys? if you're on irc, come  #emacs on
>> irc.gnu.org ... i think it would be good we take this to the emacs  and 
>> debian-devel
>> mailinglists....
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Regarding GNU Emacs, I have been in communication on the mailing list  there 
> and believe the stars are still aligned for this port to be  accepted into 
> mainline CVS sometime within the next six months.   However this will be the 
> unicode-2 (to-be-emacs-23) branch only,  unless someone wants to put some 
> effort into getting non-ascii  rendering working under emacs-22.
> 
> The 22/23 issue also relates to getting into Debian.  Currently  Debian seems 
> to have "emacs21" and "emacs-snapshot".  Since emacs- snapshot is basically 
> emacs-22, I doubt it is sharing very much lisp  with emacs21 -- it probably 
> puts 70 MB under /usr/share/emacs/22.0.50  which nothing else uses, and uses 
> little or nothing out of emacsen- common.   Given this status, perhaps the 
> debian-emacs people would be  satisfied by simply building Emacs.app to put 
> its lisp under /usr/ share/emacs/23.0.0.  (That way it could theoretically 
> share with  emacs-23 once emacs-snapshot moves to that version sometime in  
> 2006.)  I think we should bring this out on the debian-emacs list as  you 
> suggested.. if you send a msg there and cc me, I can answer..
> 
> thanks,
> Adrian
> 
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> Date: 2005-11-30 00:11:59 +0100
>>  From: Joerg Jaspert <ftpmaster-8fiUuRrzOP0dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
>> Subject: emacs.app_9.0pre2-1_i386.changes REJECTED
>> 
>> Hi Maintainer,
>> 
>> rejected, this packaging attempt is broken, sorry.
>> 
>> To start with something good: In the longterm you may be able to get
>> this into Debian. But that needs a lot of changes to the packag[e| ing].
>> 
>> - You have *one* big .deb for this. Which includes all stuff that
>>    per definition needs to go into an Arch: all package.
>>    This makes 28*10 MB of useless duplication in our archive/on the
>>    mirrors.
>> 
>> - The wole package is a running FHS (and as such policy) violation.  It 
>> seems
>>    to ignore that there is usr/share for architecture independent  stuff.
>>    Oh wait, yes, thats a Gnustep problem - but there it needs to be  fixed 
>> too.
>> 
>> - You duplicate the whole emacs. Thats not good. There is nothing  to say 
>> against
>>    a new UI of a program, but the duplication has to be avoided. Im  sure 
>> that 99.9% of
>>    the includes lisp files for example dont need anything special to  run 
>> with this
>>    new UI. Please coordinate with the emacs maintainer to share as  much 
>> pieces as
>>    possible. The ideal solution would be if it builds out of the  same source
>>    (with a patch applied at built time or so), but even if not -  your 
>> package
>>    should only include the minimum needed, depending on the other emacs
>>    packages for the rest of the files.
>> 
>> Feel free to take this to the -devel or the -emacs list if you want  more
>> discussion of this.

Re: emacs.app_9.0pre2-1_i386.changes REJECTED

[Kim F. Storm]

Gürkan Sengün <gurkan@linuks.mine.nu> writes:

> For the curious and history:
> 1992 18.x http://www.linuks.mine.nu/openstep/emacs.png
> 2005 23.x http://gnu.ethz.ch/emacs.app.png

So your team will "release" emacs 23.x in 2005, while we didn't
even manage to release 22.x this year ...

Don't know whether I should put :-) or :-( here...

-- 
Kim F. Storm <storm@cua.dk> http://www.cua.dk

Re: emacs.app_9.0pre2-1_i386.changes REJECTED

[Gürkan Sengün]

On 2005-12-09 16:05:02 +0100 Kim F. Storm <storm-zmuHNDg2uOg@public.gmane.org> wrote:

> Gürkan Sengün <gurkan-2Ut+nkrRcIBypLqBFPtG/w@public.gmane.org> writes:
> 
>> For the curious and history:
>> 1992 18.x http://www.linuks.mine.nu/openstep/emacs.png
>> 2005 23.x http://gnu.ethz.ch/emacs.app.png
> 
> So your team will "release" emacs 23.x in 2005, while we didn't
> even manage to release 22.x this year ...

That is Emacs.app 9rc2, and it is based on what is in cvs/svn of
emacs for the 23.x.

> Don't know whether I should put :-) or :-( here...

I would rather like useful comments than shit like that.

Re: emacs.app_9.0pre2-1_i386.changes REJECTED

[Henrik Enberg]

> > Don't know whether I should put :-) or :-( here...
> 
> I would rather like useful comments than shit like that.

Here's a useful comment.  Are you going to release an experimental
branch that's not considered stable enough to be in the Emacs trunk
as a stable program?

Re: emacs.app_9.0pre2-1_i386.changes REJECTED

[Gürkan Sengün]

On 2005-12-09 16:43:58 +0100 Henrik Enberg <henrik.enberg-zq6IREYz3ykAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> 
wrote:

>>> Don't know whether I should put :-) or :-( here...
>> 
>> I would rather like useful comments than shit like that.
> 
> Here's a useful comment.  Are you going to release an experimental
> branch that's not considered stable enough to be in the Emacs trunk
> as a stable program?

it's just a question, but yes. i plan to release it on that
live cd that i mentioned.

Re: emacs.app_9.0pre2-1_i386.changes REJECTED

[Adrian Robert]

On Dec 9, 2005, at 10:43 AM, Henrik Enberg wrote:

>>> Don't know whether I should put :-) or :-( here...
>>
>> I would rather like useful comments than shit like that.
>
> Here's a useful comment.  Are you going to release an experimental
> branch that's not considered stable enough to be in the Emacs trunk
> as a stable program?

Well, the notion of "stable" is relative.  We were looking by analogy  
to the "emacs-snapshot' Debian package -- it's not based on a release  
of GNU Emacs, but it's still a package.  Among unreleased code, the  
unicode-2 branch of emacs is considered less stable than CVS head, I  
suppose, but it's open to debate where the line for Debian should be  
drawn.  Based on my own daily use of unicode-2, it's at least as  
stable as Head was, say, a year or so ago (though maybe the Debian  
snapshot package started more recently than that?), but I'm not sure  
this is consistent with others' experience.  And I know some people  
have said that unicode-2 is a little slower than head..

Re: emacs.app_9.0pre2-1_i386.changes REJECTED

[Stefan Monnier]

> Emacs, but it's still a package.  Among unreleased code, the  unicode-2
> branch of emacs is considered less stable than CVS head, I  suppose, but

Nitpick: you probably meant "CVS trunk" since every branch has a HEAD.


        Stefan

Re: emacs.app_9.0pre2-1_i386.changes REJECTED

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 16:12:03 +0100
> From: =?iso-8859-1?q?G=FCrkan_Seng=FCn?= <gurkan@linuks.mine.nu>
> Cc: Adrian Robert <arobert@cogsci.ucsd.edu>, emacs-devel@gnu.org,
> 	pkg-gnustep-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org,
> 	debian-emacsen@lists.debian.org
> 
> > Don't know whether I should put :-) or :-( here...
> 
> I would rather like useful comments than shit like that.

If you continue to be rude like this, you won't hear anything at all.

Re: emacs.app_9.0pre2-1_i386.changes REJECTED

[Gürkan Sengün]

On 2005-12-09 20:33:11 +0100 Eli Zaretskii <eliz-mXXj517/zsQ@public.gmane.org> wrote:

>> Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 16:12:03 +0100
>>  From: =?iso-8859-1?q?G=FCrkan_Seng=FCn?= <gurkan-2Ut+nkrRcIBypLqBFPtG/w@public.gmane.org>
>> Cc: Adrian Robert <arobert-d/oR9/Rhuc7WRYXM/atV4Q@public.gmane.org>, emacs-devel-mXXj517/zsQ@public.gmane.org,
>> 	pkg-gnustep-maintainers-XbBxUvOt3X2LieD7tvxI8l/i77bcL1HB@public.gmane.org,
>> 	debian-emacsen-0aAXYlwwYIJuHlm7Suoebg@public.gmane.org
>> 
>>> Don't know whether I should put :-) or :-( here...
>> 
>> I would rather like useful comments than shit like that.
> 
> If you continue to be rude like this, you won't hear anything at all.

He started it by not having read the information i gave carefully.
What did he want to say anyways?

Re: emacs.app_9.0pre2-1_i386.changes REJECTED

[David Kastrup]

Gürkan Sengün <gurkan@linuks.mine.nu> writes:

> On 2005-12-09 20:33:11 +0100 Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
>
>>> Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 16:12:03 +0100
>>>  From: =?iso-8859-1?q?G=FCrkan_Seng=FCn?= <gurkan@linuks.mine.nu>
>>> Cc: Adrian Robert <arobert@cogsci.ucsd.edu>, emacs-devel@gnu.org,
>>> 	pkg-gnustep-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org,
>>> 	debian-emacsen@lists.debian.org
>>> 
>>>> Don't know whether I should put :-) or :-( here...
>>> I would rather like useful comments than shit like that.
>> If you continue to be rude like this, you won't hear anything at
>> all.
>
> He started it by not having read the information i gave carefully.

I don't think that rude language is a useful aid to understanding, and
Kim certainly did not "start it", where "it" means anything close to
using four-letter words.  If you consider "not reading carefully" on
the part of Kim an equal offense to your choice of words, you either
have strange ideas of conduct, or you consider him quite less
deserving of respect than yourself.  Even if this happened to be the
case, letting it show is not conducive to further cooperation, and a
somewhat more diplomatic approach would seem more expedient.

> What did he want to say anyways?

It would appear to obvious to me after reading the information he gave
carefully, that he wanted to express his opinion that releasing
something from an unstable branch does not sound like the best idea.

If I were to adopt your standards of discussion, I should probably use
rude language for pointing out that I considered this obvious from
what Kim wrote.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: emacs.app_9.0pre2-1_i386.changes REJECTED

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 20:50:14 +0100
> From: =?iso-8859-1?q?G=FCrkan_Seng=FCn?= <gurkan-2Ut+nkrRcIBypLqBFPtG/w@public.gmane.org>
> Cc: debian-emacsen-0aAXYlwwYIJuHlm7Suoebg@public.gmane.org, arobert-d/oR9/Rhuc7WRYXM/atV4Q@public.gmane.org,
> 	emacs-devel-mXXj517/zsQ@public.gmane.org,
> 	pkg-gnustep-maintainers-XbBxUvOt3X2LieD7tvxI8l/i77bcL1HB@public.gmane.org, storm-zmuHNDg2uOg@public.gmane.org
> 
> On 2005-12-09 20:33:11 +0100 Eli Zaretskii <eliz-mXXj517/zsQ@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> 
> >> Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 16:12:03 +0100
> >>  From: =?iso-8859-1?q?G=FCrkan_Seng=FCn?= <gurkan-2Ut+nkrRcIBypLqBFPtG/w@public.gmane.org>
> >> Cc: Adrian Robert <arobert-d/oR9/Rhuc7WRYXM/atV4Q@public.gmane.org>, emacs-devel-mXXj517/zsQ@public.gmane.org,
> >> 	pkg-gnustep-maintainers-XbBxUvOt3X2LieD7tvxI8l/i77bcL1HB@public.gmane.org,
> >> 	debian-emacsen-0aAXYlwwYIJuHlm7Suoebg@public.gmane.org
> >> 
> >>> Don't know whether I should put :-) or :-( here...
> >> 
> >> I would rather like useful comments than shit like that.
> > 
> > If you continue to be rude like this, you won't hear anything at all.
> 
> He started it by not having read the information i gave carefully.
> What did he want to say anyways?

See the message from Nick: Kim didn't ``start'' anything, he was just
trying to be humorous about the time it takes us to release Emacs 22.

Re: emacs.app_9.0pre2-1_i386.changes REJECTED

[Nick Roberts]

 > > So your team will "release" emacs 23.x in 2005, while we didn't
 > > even manage to release 22.x this year ...
 > 
 > That is Emacs.app 9rc2, and it is based on what is in cvs/svn of
 > emacs for the 23.x.
 > 
 > > Don't know whether I should put :-) or :-( here...
 > 
 > I would rather like useful comments than shit like that.

The irony is intended as a reflection of Emacs development as much as
anything else.  If you're looking for help on this list, a more relaxed
approach would be more effective.

Nick

Re: emacs.app_9.0pre2-1_i386.changes REJECTED

[Adrian Robert]

On Dec 9, 2005, at 10:05 AM, Kim F. Storm wrote:

> Gürkan Sengün <gurkan@linuks.mine.nu> writes:
>
>> For the curious and history:
>> 1992 18.x http://www.linuks.mine.nu/openstep/emacs.png
>> 2005 23.x http://gnu.ethz.ch/emacs.app.png
>
> So your team will "release" emacs 23.x in 2005, while we didn't
> even manage to release 22.x this year ...

Hi,

I'm probably to blame here -- I've been using the term "emacs-23" in  
some places as a shorter, snappier alternative to "GNU emacs CVS,  
unicode-2 branch", to indicate exactly what version of GNU Emacs  
Emacs.app is based on.  I didn't intend for it to be misleading, or  
suggest that emacs-23 is in any way due for release soon, or that  
emacs-23 definitely WILL be based on the unicode-2 branch.  Maybe, to  
avoid confusion, it's best to just drop use of the term "emacs 23"  
completely for now?

I assume though that a Debian package for Emacs.app or any other  
unicode-2 based version won't constitute "release" of GNU Emacs any  
more than the existing package based on emacs CVS HEAD constitutes a  
22.x release.

BTW, in response to Gürkan's original email, I wanted to point out  
that Emacs.app is still a work-in-progress -- independently of the  
state of CVS/Unicode-2 (which seems pretty good), there is much to be  
done with keyboard input, toolbars, etc., all outlined here: http:// 
emacs-app.sourceforge.net/KNOWN-ISSUES.txt and here: http://emacs- 
app.sourceforge.net/TODO.txt .  Nonetheless, Emacs.app is perfectly  
serviceable as a daily editor under GNUstep and OS X right now, if  
you don't need those functions.  It is, however, hard to build under  
GNUstep, which is part of the reason for working on a Debian package.

thanks,
Adrian

Re: emacs.app_9.0pre2-1_i386.changes REJECTED

[Richard M. Stallman]

    Adrian Robert has been working hard on the Emacs.app port for systems with
    AppKit and FoundationKit:
    http://emacs-app.sourceforge.net/

Does this work with GNUstep?  If so, that increases our desire to
install it.  But if it makes nontrivial changes in system-independent
files, we should do it after the Emacs 22 release.