Yoni Rabkin Katzenell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Adding our own private versions of existing files is not a beautiful > approach. What if someone already uses those libraries and gets a > namespace collision? Will the functions in our copies of http-* all > have unique Emms names?
It might not be beautiful, but it is best for the user, in my opinion. I think that as long as we are distributing simple bugfixes and not new features with these libraries, there is no problem with including them. This especially holds for libraries that have not been modified in a while (which is the case for both tq.el -- though I've committed my changes upstream for Emacs22 -- and http-get|post.el). -- Michael Olson -- FSF Associate Member #652 -- http://www.mwolson.org/ Interests: Emacs Lisp, text markup, protocols -- Jabber: mwolson_at_hcoop.net /` |\ | | | Projects: Emacs, Muse, ERC, EMMS, Planner, ErBot, DVC |_] | \| |_| Reclaim your digital rights by eliminating DRM. See http://www.defectivebydesign.org/what_is_drm for details.
pgprHMD8Lgxlp.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Emms-help mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emms-help
