Richard M. Stallman wrote:
>Nothing important in the design of Emacs should be designed for the
>sake of Windows, because that would be giving Windows influence it
>should not have.
>
There are many roads to the goal. How can one be sure which step is the
best without considering advantages and drawbacks with an open mind?
The question is not whether to be open to consider advantages and
drawbacks. The question is which of them matter.
What I've told you is that advantages only for Windows users are not
important advantages for the GNU Project. Our goal is to replace
Windows, not to enhance it, and we must not allow ourselves to be
distracted from this goal for the convenience of Windows users.
Yes, I agree to that, but maybe that does not mean that "advantages only
for Windows users" are unimportant and does not contribute to GNU? For
example I have found myself spending a lot of time trying to overcome
different problems I meet in Emacs as a Windows users. There might be
many possible contributors on Windows that does the same. Would it not
be an advantage for GNU if we could spend more of our power actually
contributing to the overall project?
We may perhaps also contribute with our knowledge of Windows. We can
tell what we think are good on Windows and what we lack in Emacs and
GNU/Linux. There are plenty of things that I believe could benefit from
studying Windows solutions. Do you not think that this could speed up
the development? Is not this a viable strategy?
_______________________________________________
Emacs-devel mailing list
Emacs-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel