On Thu, Jun 30, 2005 at 04:17:59PM +0900, Miles Bader wrote: > 2005/6/30, Ilya Zakharevich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > I suspect that in this case "a proper merge" will consist of removing > > > > 95% of changes made w.r.t. the reference (my) implementation. > > > > > > Perhaps so, but somebody has to make that judgement... > > > > Sure. Do you know somebody more quialified than me? > > Well if you've gone though the changes in the Emacs CVS and determined > that they're all safely discarded, then sure, of course; but your > previous posts to the thread made it sound as if you hadn't looked at > the details.
Not now. But I did during the previous iteration - when I released v5.0 (it was not 95% that time; but *for non-configuration type edits* it might have been about 100%). And what I see are the bug reports which are solved by switching from FSF's version. Trying to maintain two separate versions was a bold experiment; I supported it for a long time. However, it looks like this experiment failed miserably - most of FSF edits are backwards in usability. *Something* must be done in this situation. [I realize that it is a potentially painful topic; it does not help that a lot of people find my writing style offending. My apologies (including "in advance"); it is not intendend.] Yours, Ilya _______________________________________________ Emacs-devel mailing list Emacs-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel
