Juanma Barranquero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On 8/6/05, Eli Zaretskii <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I'd say, if no one posts any practical comments in a week or so, go >> ahead and commit the changes. After all, the Emacs development rules >> do not mandate any peer review at all. > > You're right. > > I would've liked some comments, though, for two reasons: > > - It's an incompatible change, if small: --socket-name does not > exist, and you *must* use either the EMACS_SERVER_FILE environment > variable or the --server-file argument to emacsclient; otherwise > emacsclient will refuse to work.
Uh what? Isn't there a default file name? > - I've been vocal in stressing that I think our freeze is not very > cold at all. So I'd like someone with a more objective POV to decide > whether this (making emacsclient/server work on Windows and from > remote machines) is a bug fix or a new feature. It is a new feature fixing a bug. > Of course I'd like to include it now, but I won't complain if the > decision goes to shelving it for the moment being. In my opinion it is one thing worth the hassle of ironing out, though it is definitely new. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum _______________________________________________ Emacs-devel mailing list Emacs-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel
