Hi, Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Seeing as this is an editor and a "GTK+ based simple text editor" I > > doubt it has much claim to emacs-ness. > > why does this matter ? if an application includes optional support > for an "emacs skin" such that it includes emacs > bindings/shortcuts/whatever, it sounds to me like USE=emacs is > appropriate. ive seen random applications that have different > keybinding modes have the default set, and then optional vi or emacs > to select from so that things behave as such users would expect. -mike We have USE=xemacs and emacs...and the key bindings for above editor will switch to something that is also compatible with XEmacs. So why shouldn't one choose USE=xemacs here? We, XEmacs and GNU Emacs team, understand "our" USE flags as integration with said editors not something to mimick their behaviour.
V-Li -- Christian Faulhammer, Gentoo Lisp project <URL:http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/lisp/>, #gentoo-lisp on FreeNode <URL:http://www.faulhammer.org/>
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
