"Richard M. Stallman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > If we do that, we might as well delete lazy-lock.el and fast-lock.el > rather than leave them in obsolete. > > We don't normally delete packages that are obsolete, we normally put > them in the `obsolete' directory. Is there a reason to treat these > differently?
If we alias their main functions to a function from a non-obsolete package, we are treating them differently from the other packages in obsolete. I thought the packages in obsolete were there in case someone still has a need for them - eg old terminal types that we think are no longer in use, but can't be sure. _______________________________________________ Emacs-pretest-bug mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-pretest-bug
