Changes in font locking
David Kastrup
dak at gnu.org
Wed Mar 14 03:21:49 EDT 2007
"Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen at xemacs.org> writes:
> David Kastrup writes:
>
> > You conveniently snipped the end of the sentence:
> >
> > for an XEmacs developer with CVS access.
> >
> > Do you really consider this sort of creative editing appropriate
> > behavior?
>
> Indeed I do!
I have my doubts that your standards of conduct are to the best of
XEmacs.
> Your previous post was an ad hominem attack,
Aren't they all? That's probably why I have to mark at least half of
them with "<rant>" tags as you claim. How about supporting either
claim in a believable manner?
> implying that the irrelevant personal status of "XEmacs developer"
> imposes some kind of duty on me that doesn't apply equally well to
> (eg) you. I chose to ignore the attack, and focus on the content.
You have the CVS readily available, checked out, and in a state
allowing not just C-x v g, but also checking any needed change in. I
have neither time nor disk space nor interest to check out a copy of
XEmacs.
> I think it might very well be useful if someone would use cvs
> annotate on the relevant library, and look at the ChangeLog, to
> investigate who put the call to `copy-syntax-table' in, and ask them
> if they would explain why. Would somebody with an interest in
> fixing the bug in with-syntax-table like to do that?
It is not like you have not been sent a patch and explanation several
times on this list, by several parties on several occasions.
That is another reason why an XEmacs developer is required here:
people without write access just get ignored, abused or both.
--
David Kastrup
More information about the XEmacs-Beta
mailing list