En réponse à Rob Browning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> ISTR they may have added some more fringe options in 21.3, but I'd
> have to check to be sure.
No they haven't. They targetted this at 21.4.
> One thing I'm not all that happy about is the xaw3d scrollbars. I'm
> tempted to go back to the plain o
Rob Browning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hmm. One problem I have is that the "new" scrollbars are actually a
> loss functionality-wise. Being able to scroll up or down with
> left/right clicks is useful...
I agree about the button functionality -- I think the GTK scrollbars suck
functionally (
Miles Bader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> There's clearly a strong retro contingent in the emacs community, but even
> there, I think a general rule is that -- for better or for worse -- `eye
> candy matters.' This is especially true for newbie users.
>
> For this reason, I think that if there's
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 12:03:32PM -0500, Rob Browning wrote:
> One thing I'm not all that happy about is the xaw3d scrollbars. I'm
> tempted to go back to the plain ones. They seemed cleaner and more
> functional to me. I suppose I'm also going to have to think about
> what (if anything) I migh
Miles Bader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>From what I've seen on the emacs groups, it's mostly people who are
> very conservative about changing what works, and those who dislike
> the `new fangled' look of emacs 21.
If you just turn off the toolbar and menubar, it's surprisingly less
fangled. I
Peter S Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm not a great fan of orphaning complicated packages. Are there users
> that need emacs20 because emacs21 is broken for some things? If not,
> and there's no real reason for emacs20, I'd suggest that you offer it up
> for adoption but don't orphan
"Thomas F. Burdick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> While emacs21 is unusable on things like Sun Ultra-1's and Pentiums,
> it's also unusable in some shared and networked environments, even
> with top-of-the-line hardware. Emacs21 is a resource hog compared to
> 20. Not so much in terms of memory,
Scott Blachowicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Peter S Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Still, the fact that some users want to staick with emacs20 forever
> > doesn't mean it has to be a Debian package. :-)
> > Although having it work with all the packaged elisp stuff is a good
> > thi
Dan Jacobson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Miles> would be a good idea to have an `emacs21-for-slow-machines' package.
> Naw. Do
> $ emacs21 --no-site-file -q -nw
> $ emacs21 -q -nw
> $ emacs21 --no-site-file -nw
> $ emacs21 -nw
> $ emacs21
> etc. to see where the problem lies. The first should
Miles> would be a good idea to have an `emacs21-for-slow-machines' package.
Naw. Do
$ emacs21 --no-site-file -q -nw
$ emacs21 -q -nw
$ emacs21 --no-site-file -nw
$ emacs21 -nw
$ emacs21
etc. to see where the problem lies. The first should be lightning fast.
Miles> I expect the latter group could largely be satisfied by a
guide to Miles> turning off the various new features of emacs 21
that they dislike What happened to the anti news file? I
distinctly remember an anti news file. P.S. in
/usr/share/emacs/21.2/etc/enriched.doc the line Faces: def
Peter S Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Still, the fact that some users want to staick with emacs20 forever
> doesn't mean it has to be a Debian package. :-)
> Although having it work with all the packaged elisp stuff is a good
> thing.
One thing I've wanted before is the ability to integ
Hmm, well perhaps the slowdown we saw here has something to do with
local conditions.
Miles Bader wrote:
|> Can you be more specific than just `general slowdown'?
|>
|> E.g. Does the slowdown:
|>
|> * occur locally or only with remote X connections? [the most common case]
|>
|> * occur usin
On Fri, May 09, 2003 at 02:08:38PM +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
> "Thomas F. Burdick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > While emacs21 is unusable on things like Sun Ultra-1's and Pentiums,
> > it's also unusable in some shared and networked environments, even
> > with top-of-the-line hardware. Emacs21
> "JM" == Jim McCloskey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
JM> |> While there are specific problem areas in emacs 21, mostly related to
JM> |> traffic over the X connection, I think most of those problems can be
JM> |> worked around by tweaking the configuration appropriately (e.g., toolbar
JM> |> to
Jim McCloskey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hmm, well, general slowdown is certainly what we saw here.
Can you be more specific than just `general slowdown'?
E.g. Does the slowdown:
* occur locally or only with remote X connections? [the most common case]
* occur using `emacs -nw' too, or
|> While there are specific problem areas in emacs 21, mostly related to
|> traffic over the X connection, I think most of those problems can be
|> worked around by tweaking the configuration appropriately (e.g., toolbar
|> too slow? turn off the toolbar!), and I'm not aware of any general
|> slow
"Thomas F. Burdick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> While emacs21 is unusable on things like Sun Ultra-1's and Pentiums,
> it's also unusable in some shared and networked environments, even
> with top-of-the-line hardware. Emacs21 is a resource hog compared to
> 20. Not so much in terms of memory,
Jim McCloskey writes:
>
> |> I'm not a great fan of orphaning complicated packages. Are there users
> |> that need emacs20 because emacs21 is broken for some things?
>
> So it's not just an issue of what's broken, I think. It's also a
> matter of whether the number of users in the situati
Miles Bader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Peter S Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I'm not a great fan of orphaning complicated packages. Are there users
> > that need emacs20 because emacs21 is broken for some things?
>
> From what I've seen on the emacs groups, it's mostly people who a
|> I'm not a great fan of orphaning complicated packages. Are there users
|> that need emacs20 because emacs21 is broken for some things?
Here we have a graduate student lab with a lot of Debian
machines. Because it's a graduate student lab, and therefore at the
bottom of the totem-pole as far
Peter S Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm not a great fan of orphaning complicated packages. Are there users
> that need emacs20 because emacs21 is broken for some things?
>From what I've seen on the emacs groups, it's mostly people who are
very conservative about changing what works, a
Rob Browning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm wondering about the future of the emacs20 package(s).
> I suppose the options are for me to orphan it, for
> someone else to take it over, or for me to suck it up and get back to
> work on it.
>
> Thoughts?
I'm not a great fan of or
I'm wondering about the future of the emacs20 package(s). I'm still
listed as the maintainer, but I'm having a hard time getting myself
excited about fixing bugs in emacs20 when I'd rather spend that time
on emacs 21 (then 22, then ...), guile, etc.
I haven't made any official decision yet, but
24 matches
Mail list logo
