Rick, Thank you for explaining your position. My wording may have been clumsy but I agree with everything you write.
The discussion is not about changing anything for people who already use one or the other mode. It is about proposing something easy to use *and* not confusing to new comers. Besides for the merits of the various modes and the merits of having multiple modes, I think there is a big documentation issue. It is easily fixable and since that information is on the wiki that's something I can fix. Then there is literally a ressource visibility issue at least on Debian. This one is not easy to fix and requires information from the Debian packager. I can ask for more information and see if there is a relatively easy fix. There is also a maintenance issue for the official mode. From what I understand, there seems to be 3 different versions of that mode and the authors are not active anymore (and have not been for 6 years)... In all honesty, if picolisp had not been maintained and updated for 6 years, would you consider using it ? I don't think you would. Jean-Christophe > On Jan 23, 2019, at 15:20, r...@tamos.net <mailto:r...@tamos.net> wrote: > > On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 16:11 -05:00, Alexis wrote: >> Having said all that, if the PicoLisp community generally felt it >> would be best to settle on the mode currently bundled with the >> distribution as /the/ Emacs mode for PicoLisp, and wanted me to >> remove my mode from MELPA - or at least, rename it - in order to >> avoid confusion, i'd be fine with that as well. :-) > > No! :) First of all, there is no /the/ emacs mode for picolisp. At > the very least, that is my personal opinion. beneroth mentioned on > irc that there are picolisp users who use each of the known (including > yours) picolisp modes. I don't think that they believe there is a > "/the/ mode". :) > > Also, "No!' goes for renaming or removing your code on melpa. Please > do not do this. It is unnecessary. I believe that you and the melpa > people resolved this correctly. I don't think anybody here believes > that you "stole" or "sneaked" your code into melpa before any of the > previously written mode authors could (in the "mwahahaha!" style, > twirling the end of your mustache :). That would be silly. Anyway, > those authors had plenty of time to register their mode with melpa if > they wanted to. They didn't. (And you honestly didn't know about the > others.) melpa is just not an essential; it's just a nice > convenience. I get that milkypostman wants melpa to "win mindshare" > or whatever his goals and motives are -- he certainly seems to believe > in /the/ way. Hey, as long as I can still source packages from > where-ever, the melpa people can do whatever they want. > > Anyway, that was very admirable of you to consider the community > though. Thanks, man! > > Cheers, --Rick > > -- > UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picolisp@software-lab.de?subject=Unsubscribe > <mailto:picolisp@software-lab.de?subject=Unsubscribe> Jean-Christophe Helary ----------------------------------------------- http://mac4translators.blogspot.com <http://mac4translators.blogspot.com/> @brandelune
