From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "John Wiegley" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Taming some chaos Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2015 22:30:46 -0700 Organization: New Artisans LLC Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1445146264 5312 80.91.229.3 (18 Oct 2015 05:31:04 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2015 05:31:04 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Emacs developers To: John Yates Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Oct 18 07:30:59 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ZngYd-0001AV-A4 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 18 Oct 2015 07:30:59 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60717 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZngYc-0006AP-BH for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 18 Oct 2015 01:30:58 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35865) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZngYZ-0006AB-NE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Oct 2015 01:30:56 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZngYW-000601-Q1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Oct 2015 01:30:55 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-pa0-x232.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400e:c03::232]:35449) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZngYW-0005zs-KC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Oct 2015 01:30:52 -0400 Original-Received: by pabws5 with SMTP id ws5so6804478pab.2 for ; Sat, 17 Oct 2015 22:30:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:date:organization:message-id :references:user-agent:mail-followup-to:mime-version:content-type; bh=dPa2Zg+UftvHUlqYinquoL3rOUrXU++ihV6yBsUfOlU=; b=JV9cf8GrGzErQ0LjZU4skVzvwZtsp7k5NWWUcNMAmdsi7dp83ivO2DHFXTUpce7GrU pcuNW1Rb+gAcGWYXV2ZCST3bKeIrl37oD70KHSYQjVp5+OrCJHsbiFQpM7DeXA6pI9n0 tLnvl+5HjayBx/zATbaVlIw9eULRt1QlHzUY/BvhaIfHrgL+JlntVtypkl1ce95xIOg6 lfC7paWogZFhcbG+gduBMWGvPDcSDr3qrGw016lS0uzdv7Ina71YfC2W6JrUCcgXivRV TGC2sbEruVuVLuWNevktAHPDO7PM8fV3WjLWT4Eg3y3y/pNyrIAZbayZQNa+m/keElN5 97XA== X-Received: by 10.66.189.232 with SMTP id gl8mr26568822pac.52.1445146252115; Sat, 17 Oct 2015 22:30:52 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from Vulcan.local (76-234-68-79.lightspeed.frokca.sbcglobal.net. [76.234.68.79]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ux3sm8731080pac.18.2015.10.17.22.30.50 (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 17 Oct 2015 22:30:51 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by Vulcan.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id 0F2D9F45A90C; Sat, 17 Oct 2015 22:30:49 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: (John Yates's message of "Sat, 17 Oct 2015 11:16:02 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (darwin) Mail-Followup-To: John Yates , Emacs developers X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:400e:c03::232 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:191911 Archived-At: >>>>> John Yates writes: > The Emacs community has long felt like a collection of bright, polite coders > pursuing individual visions and scratching personal itches. In your postings > to the ML it seemed you were interested in stepping forward to provide the > leadership needed to get us to rally to vision of an enticing Emacs future. > Articulating such a vision inherently involves contrasting it with the > current state of affairs. I had hoped that my note would be taken as a > contribution to a discussion about things could be improved. Hi John! I apologize for apparently having misread your intent completely. Reading this last message, I couldn't agree with you more, both in sentiment and approach. I think we want almost exactly the same things. Please allow me take back any criticism of your ideas as being too wild, and encourage you to rephrase them with an eye to "maintaining existing value". Can we correct past decisions in the light of new advances, in a way that carries forward the merits of that past? I find myself in the strange position of wanting change -- even radical change -- while equally wanting to respect the tremendous value and experience we've built up over the decades. Striking this balance at the right points is key. John