Re: EmacsW32 invocation options

["Juanma Barranquero" <lekktu@gmail.com>]

On 5/2/07, Lennart Borgman (gmail) <lennart.borgman@gmail.com> wrote:

> I am sorry if I gave the impression that you and others did not take
> part at all. But when I finally gave Emacs client a (logical) structure
> that seemed relevant to me I did not get feedback on that.

You *did* get feedback. Some of that feedback said: "it is too late".
Some was "I don't agree with your (logical) structure, I think we
should discuss it a little more". Some of it said "the implementation
is confusing". There was also "it's not that big of an issue, and we
don't want to further delay the issue". Some feedback was silence (and
then Warnock's dilemma apply). Some feedback was positive. You seem to
talk of non-positive feedback as "no feedback".

> And I really
> tested different possibilities a lot.

I *know* you invested a lot of effort. Why should that mean that the
answer reached is optimal, or even good?

> You must be misunderstanding something very much.

Yes, I'm "misunderstanding" your comment: "I really tried to open a
discussion about it, but I did not get much company."

> There were a lot of such reports before people realized that they did
> not had to start the server in .emacs.

Then you agree with me: there were bug reports.

             Juanma