>>>>> On 18 Dec 1999 00:22:33 -0600 >>>>> "RB" == Rob Browning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote...
RB> In the longer run, I just want to make it clear that I'll be hesitant RB> to include any patches that substantially effect the behavior of emacs RB> unless they're approved by the emacs developers, so your best route RB> will be to go through them. However, if the upstream developers do RB> approve the patches, then I'll be more than happy to include them. Yes, right. RB> Also be aware that it's my understanding that *no* xemacs code can be RB> accepted by emacs unless the author's willing to sign over the RB> copyrights. I know too, and I have heard some stories of rejected patches for Emacs. For examples, Canna support, XIM support, or so. Probably, they will not be merged to Emacs. But I think that we can fork package on Debian. (cf. FreeBSD Project has some patched emacs) Well, I will maintain package of patched Emacs20 as mule4 (forking) In the future, if they became needless, we can remove mule4 package from Debian. Regards. -- Takuo KITAME [EMAIL PROTECTED]
