Juanma Barranquero wrote:
On 4/16/07, Lennart Borgman (gmail) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I really did not say so of course. I suggested reading my arguments.
I did. I've read this thread in full. I know nothing about the
redisplay code (I've taken a few looks at it and that's all), but
AFAIK you're not very knowledgeable about it either. OTOH, it seems
that people who really knows it inside and out is unconvinced that
changing it now is safe. Excuse me if I trust their opinion.
Ok, that is fine, but see below.
Is not that a better level of discussion?
I'd suggest as a better level of discussion if you presupposed that
people who disagrees with your arguments *perhaps* does so for reasons
other than "not having read them"...
Ok, sorry.
Then what arguments are actually convincing to you? For sure I found it
troublesome to change that code now. There is however no other way to
fix the bug.
I know that both Kim and Chong hesitate to do the changes now. My
argument is not that I do not trust them. I try to look at the actual
changes and estimate the chances that it can go wrong. Then I try to get
their feedback on this because I know that they know the code better
from both a present and a historical point of view. Chong has given
concrete feedback to the list to the fix I sent. Kim has not done so yet
and I do not know if he will give feedback on that level.
You are of course free to take any standpoint you want, but I think it
would be nice and useful if you tried to keep it on the level I suggest
above. If you just want to say that you do not want that change to be
made now that is also ok.
_______________________________________________
emacs-pretest-bug mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-pretest-bug
