From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: newsticker-*.el files Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 11:06:24 +0300 Message-ID: References: <200806082201.m58M142d000380@sallyv1.ics.uci.edu> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1212998822 21287 80.91.229.12 (9 Jun 2008 08:07:02 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2008 08:07:02 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ulf.jasper@web.de, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Dan Nicolaescu Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jun 09 10:07:44 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1K5cPn-0005HD-MW for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 09 Jun 2008 10:07:43 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59482 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1K5cOy-0003N2-4l for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 09 Jun 2008 04:06:52 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1K5cOs-0003Mx-Hk for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Jun 2008 04:06:46 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1K5cOq-0003Mk-KA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Jun 2008 04:06:46 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=45250 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1K5cOq-0003Mh-Dx for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Jun 2008 04:06:44 -0400 Original-Received: from mx20.gnu.org ([199.232.41.8]:41448) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1K5cOq-0005AL-82 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Jun 2008 04:06:44 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout3.012.net.il ([84.95.2.7]) by mx20.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1K5cOp-00041B-4m for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Jun 2008 04:06:43 -0400 Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([80.230.28.131]) by i_mtaout3.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2004.12) with ESMTPA id <0K260074USJO3Z60@i_mtaout3.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Jun 2008 11:21:40 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: <200806082201.m58M142d000380@sallyv1.ics.uci.edu> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-kernel: by mx20.gnu.org: Solaris 9.1 X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:98773 Archived-At: > From: Dan Nicolaescu > Cc: Ulf Jasper , emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Sun, 08 Jun 2008 15:01:04 -0700 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > > The newly installed newsticker-*.el files cause file-name clashes on > > 8+3 (a.k.a. DOS) filesystems. Can we rename them in a way that avoids > > such clashes? All that is needed that the first 8 characters of the > > basename be different; as long as they are, there's no problem for the > > basename itself to be longer than 8 characters. > > The DOS port currently does not work, it has been approved for removal, > and you said that it might never be revived. > > Why do this work now, when it's highly possible that the uglyfied names > might never be needed? > > Why not do the renaming work at the time when the DOS platform is > brought back to life? Why ask these questions time and again, when I already answered them several times in the past? Here goes again: I'm asking not to make my life harder if and when I find time to make the DOS port of Emacs 23 work again. Doing all of the renames later will make it much harder, especially since CVS doesn't cope well with renaming; doing it now doesn't lose any CVS history, and doesn't require contacting all of the package maintainers at once. The author agreed (in private email to me) to rename the files when he has time. I trust him that the names he comes up with will not be ugly, because it's his package. So it's a non-issue, and making it an issue each time this comes up only eats up more of our resources than is necessary. If you indeed cherish so much our resources, why waste them on this subject time and again? It almost sounds like you have an agenda here. Do you?