On 11/16/2013 02:06 PM, Sune Vuorela wrote: > I'm kind of wondering why we are arguing how someone who has > maintained zlib longer than the rest of us have been DDs combined > should spend his time.
I'm not criticizing him, I'm criticizing the idea. Or, putting it the other way around, I think it should still be allowed to voice my opinion and doubts even about the plans of someone who has been in Debian much longer than I am. > Mark has a great and long track record in debian and apparantly needs > xemacs21 to do proper work, why should we put obstacles in the way for > that? I was in no way doubting that Mark hasn't the necessary skills and or motivation, that was out of the question and I find it quite unfair that you move my argumentation into that direction. My point is that XEmacs isn't really being developed anymore and I don't think it's a good idea to re-introduce a package which was just recently removed for that particular reason. If someone actually came up and said that XEmacs has feature XYZ that is completely missing in emacs, I might see the point. But risking bugs which won't get addressed in a timely manner because upstream doesn't really work anymore can't be justified with the argument that some people think the interface of XEmacs is prettier than the one of GNU emacs. Adrian -- .''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz : :' : Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org `. `' Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de `- GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/528776b4....@physik.fu-berlin.de
