On 12/20/06, Lennart Borgman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I guess you mean logical relation?
Causal. Arguing for bug fixes does not cause you having to do an
alternate distribution. So the fact that you argue for bugs has no
bearing on whether you do an alternate distribution or not. I do argue
for bug fixes. I don't have my own distribution.
At the moment I think the benefits outweighs the problem, but if some of
the more nagging bugs/missing features were corrected I think I would
change my mind.
Your distribution gets notoriety as a "better way to use Emacs on
Windows", i.e., it's better for an Emacs user on Windows to use yours
than the standard one. If you someday change your mind, there's
nothing stopping someone from deciding that he will continue
maintaining the "improved for Windows" version.
I'm not saying it is going to happen. I'm not ever saying it is likely
to happen. But it is not difficult to happen. Some projects never
fork; others... well, look at GNU Arch / Baz / Bazaar / ArX.
/L/e/k/t/u
_______________________________________________
emacs-pretest-bug mailing list
emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-pretest-bug
