From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Android port of Emacs Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2023 12:53:34 -0400 Message-ID: References: <83v8fnslfz.fsf@gnu.org> <121acd3282a64abf77d6@heytings.org> <215b00d2595bec215977@heytings.org> <215b00d2598ab5cc7d0a@heytings.org> <489f350ce63391ec8d49@heytings.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="30049"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Gregory Heytings Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Jul 13 18:54:52 2023 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1qJzad-0007a0-QA for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 13 Jul 2023 18:54:52 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qJzZX-0002R0-Tu; Thu, 13 Jul 2023 12:53:43 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qJzZV-0002Qc-QX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Jul 2023 12:53:41 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qJzZS-0007gg-V7 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Jul 2023 12:53:41 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 9EF4A441EB0; Thu, 13 Jul 2023 12:53:36 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 2402E441D87; Thu, 13 Jul 2023 12:53:35 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1689267215; bh=QgemObkGleXzwKa267otELWppRT773GfIH7OJJh2tjI=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=ecEa+nhDO5BQQ4UxSm4B5RvdqkpBXmamT6M3rOYlVdwPZHGqfoWB6hGrH240UHzY9 ZJgedELdHkJq9Lh4Bt2oLPBjDuuFye1W1Q8oTKi9VUcrBnSYJb32qUfEEWVUxUkHa6 Qq+LSZbfTgg4xeGMt7bIzJfWb7M+804IZ1yOImO1j4+qXO5q+lHSbmnQTDs5nCImm8 HXPqwwM4Ncx3R/laNT4kbRV2AKHXvx7b5n8WtpQ0B4jdvhrWuaeIBUHkEp0dvvwm3Q co4Os6gqG3JQZX0/aBMRX+/uM0y0rIrvoQ5ipy/mnYx890Glqvs/NxjBzZ/2GOXHkT eO8eh9PqSZ38g== Original-Received: from lechazo (lechon.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.242]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 117D7120230; Thu, 13 Jul 2023 12:53:35 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <489f350ce63391ec8d49@heytings.org> (Gregory Heytings's message of "Thu, 13 Jul 2023 13:55:01 +0000") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:307826 Archived-At: >>> I was not suggesting that you should report bugs to Termux:X11, I was >>> asking for something more detailed than "unbearable", which contradicts >>> what others said in this thread. > Do you really have nothing more concrete than "unbearable"? No, indeed. To get something more concrete I'd have to invest more time to try it again. > Also, is it not possible that between the moment you tried to use Termux:X11 > (which started only four years ago and is under active development) and > now, it has improved, perhaps significantly so? I'm sure it's possible, and I'm really glad they work on this. I just don't see this as a reason not to include the `feature/android` code into the main branch of Emacs. AFAICT you're the one who's saying we should choose one (Emacs-via-Termux/X11) over the other (Emacs/Android). I want both. [ I've also been known to want Emacs's codebase to move towards being able to support various GUIs at the same time from the same Emacs process. ] Stefan