On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 01:35:06PM +0100, Beni wrote: > I'm sorry, I didn't make myself clear. I was talking about the AUCTeX > port. I tried to CC the maintainer but the address seems to be dead. That port is only for Emacs 21, which isn't planned for removal. > On 01/11/2013 01:31 PM, J??r??mie Courr??ges-Anglas wrote: > > Jasper Lievisse Adriaanse <jas...@openbsd.org> writes: > > > >> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 01:15:31PM +0100, Beni wrote: > >>> On 01/11/2013 09:13 AM, Jasper Lievisse Adriaanse wrote: > >>>> Hi, > >>>> > >>>> Since we have had emacs 24 around for a while now in ports, would there > >>>> be any > >>>> reasons not to remove emacs 22 and 23? I think it'd be a bad idea to keep > >>>> cluttering editors/ more than needed. > >>>> > >>>> If there are no objections (OKs also welcome) I'd like to zap them next > >>>> week. > >>>> > >>>> Cheers, > >>>> Jasper > >>> > >>> I'm not sure but doesn't AUCTeX still depend on emacs 22? > >> According to this page, AUCTeX works fine with Emacs 24: > >> http://wikemacs.org/wiki/AUCTeX#Emacs_24_and_ELPA > > > > I was planning to update it, but got stucked on finding an elegant way > > to ship emacs add-ons for multiple versions. Dropping 22 and 23 would > > kinda solve the problem, but on the other hand Emacs now has a package > > system that works reliably (for single-user setups, that is). > > >
-- Cheers, Jasper "Stay Hungry. Stay Foolish"
