[Q] Re: [xemacs-base] Add byte-compiler warning control library

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

Steve Youngs writes:

 >   > I'm not sure that that is correct though; the package version
 >   > should presumably be used when explicitly requiring from another
 >   > package.
 > 
 > That sounds like crazy talk to me. :-)

Not really.  More like "broken by design."  Consider, packages are
supposed to be version-independent, but the main use of
package-suppress is to cater to version-specific differences in
location of some libraries.  So a package wants version-independent
code (unless it knows what it's doing).

This is not the same as replacing a broken function with a fixed one,
I think.  This is taking a package internal because you want to change
its API and semantics.  That was Ben's explicit intention.

My head hurts....