Guy, I think you made the wrong decision here. James LewisMoss never responded to the 8857 bug list to your request for pulling xemacs. In fact, I couldn't find anyone other than yourself who supported the decision to pull xemacs completely. The discussion was whether xemacs-19.14 or 19.15 was the best choice for bo. Could you please state your reasons for removing xemacs? xemacs-19.14 doesn't have any fatal flaws. Bug 8857 suggested that 19.15 be the official bo xemacs; it did not suggest that xemacs-19.14 be removed from bo distribution entirely.
xemacs-19.14 and emacs conflict, but that is generally not considered a reason for removing a package. xemacs-19.14 is usable and better than nothing. Perhaps I misunderstood our policy, but I thought that a package should only be removed from stable if it has a critical bug. I didn't see any discussion on any mailing claiming that xemacs has a critical bug. In any case, the removal of xemacs requires further discussion. Please reconsider the decision to pull xemacs from bo. Guy Maor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tim Sailer) writes: > > > Since I didn't get an answer on -private, I'll do this the public > > way. Xemacs seems to be missing from bo. It's in rex and hamm. I con- > > sider a missing major package a bug unless there was a reason it > > was pulled. Brian? Anyone? > > See bug 8857. -- Kevin Dalley [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .