auctex: to submit or not to submit that is the question.

[Uwe Brauer]

>>>>> "Stephen" == Stephen J Turnbull <stephen at xemacs.org> writes:

   > Uwe Brauer writes:
   >> I therefore propose to apply the XEmacs.rules patch *before* I
   >> submit.

   > We cannot review the XEmacs.rules patch without seeing the code that
   > it is intended to support.  It is almost as important to keep unneeded
   > cruft out of the codebase as it is to add needed features.  So you are
   > saying we should apply an unreviewed patch.  That's not right; we
   > wouldn't do it for any other maintainer, either.

Right, I understand. I am only afraid of submitting something for
which I know, it will *not* work.

   > I've looked at the auto-autoload.el diff and do not understand why
   > achieving this effect needs changes to XEmacs.rules.  The review is
   > made more difficult because it appears that the diff is reversed, and
   > there are other changes besides those that would be explained by the
   > patch to XEmacs.rules (of course I can't be sure of that because I
   > don't have access to the code that generates the difference).

   > BTW, most XEmacs reviewers prefer "diff -u" as the format for
   > differences.  (Put the line "diff -u" in ~/.cvsrc on Unix systems to
   > have cvs diff use that format automatically.  There should be a
   > similar feature for Windows.)



Ok, I did now a 
diff -u NOpatch2/lisp/auctex/auto-autoloads.el
Patch/lisp/auctex/auto-autoloads.el > auto-autoloads.el.diffu

I also have added to my local apache server (I hope you can access)
the following files

    -  this diff file

    -  the tgz packages of the new auctex src directory.

    -  the Xemacs_pkg generated *without* the XEmacs.rules patch

    -  the Xemacs_pkg generated *with* the XEmacs.rules patch


The links is
http://147.96.6.137/Xemacs_pkg/


Please tell me your opinion before I submit.

Uwe Brauer