Ralf Angeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > * Didier Verna (2006-09-06) writes: > >> David Kastrup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> It would be a sign of courtesy to at least correct those if nothing >>> else. In particular the bug reporting address in >>> TeX-submit-bug-report in tex.el. >> >> OK, will do. > > The address should probably be something like > "[EMAIL PROTECTED]", because that's what > people will get to hear in 90% of all bug reports coming from an > outdated AUCTeX installation.
So what? We can prepare a form letter for that purpose. At least I don't have the moderation and reply-address change hassle which is really a big nuisance. And it means that we can finally close down the AUCTeX mailing list nonsense and Sunsite.dk terminally in a year or so. > I'd really be in favor of removing AUCTeX from the XEmacs package > repository if it cannot be updated. Well yes, but that is a much larger and invasive change and somebody would need to feel responsible enough to do it. AUCTeX is definitely not the only area of bit rot in XEmacs; there will always be someone to complain when his favorite package, however broken, falls out of sumo. In contrast to other such areas, however, upstream would at least be providing a maintained working alternative (according to our abilities; but our track record has not been really worse than that of the XEmacs-maintained AUCTeX), the question is just how people would get to know that. It is just a pity that there is no useful way of getting that knowledge into the XEmacs package manager, short of AUCTeX providing a complete XEmacs package mirror, just with AUCTeX replaced. And I really don't think that a good idea. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum _______________________________________________ auctex-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/auctex-devel
