xemacs vs emacs

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

David Kastrup writes:

 > >  > But even the versions in "pre-release" are outdated.
 > >
 > > Keeping up-to-date is a non-goal for the core developers.
 > 
 > It is a non-goal, but a frequent advertising item.  Which I find kind of
 > distasteful.

Well, that's because you don't understand the role of the package
maintainers.  Some of them do keep their packages very up-to-date.
The AUCTeX package maintainer, on the other hand, has to deal with
you, who have publicly called him incompetent.

 > >  > AUCTeX
 > >
 > > AUCTeX is a special case; the AUCTeX project maintainer objects to the
 > > XEmacs package system in principle (although he, and the project, has
 > > always been good about supporting XEmacs users of AUCTeX).
 > 
 > Stephen, when you feel yourself unable to utter anything which can't be
 > in good conscience supported by a shred of evidence, please just keep
 > quiet.
 > 
 > This is actually slander

Can't be, it is true.  You claim that a package system that requires
package maintainers to commit to a particular repository is
unsustainable.  How is that not an objection in principle?

 > repetition of such stuff.  The AUCTeX project actually _provides_ a
 > perfectly working and reasonably maintained XEmacs package _for_ the
 > XEmacs package system,

It is a tarball, not a package.  Package sources live in XEmacs CVS.
This is required because Emacs's facilities for loading modules do not
make it possible to determine dependencies reliably without trying it.

 > And I've gone out of my way to help XEmacs developers understand the
 > AUCTeX structure, providing example versions, providing information
 > about the setup, explaining every bit of it and supporting them wherever
 > I could.

Hm?  Who are these XEmacs developers and where is this information
you've provided?

 > What I won't do is to change AUCTeX's build infrastructure into one
 > supporting XEmacs-only, depending on XEmacs CVS access and being
 > developed in the XEmacs package repository.

That's not the same thing as providing an XEmacs package.  It does
require additional work to provide an XEmacs package, which you refuse
to do.  That's unfortunate for the users, but it is your right.

 > The job of a project leader as I understand it does not consist of
 > keeping the obituaries pretty and the blame assigned elsewhere.

Then stop doing that, David.