Re: [AUCTeX-devel] Re: Future AUCTeX distribution

[David Kastrup]

"Stephen J. Turnbull" <address@hidden> writes:

>>>>>> "David" == David Kastrup <address@hidden> writes:
>
>     David> Too bad the package developers might be the better choice
>     David> at times.
>
> I don't have time for this.

So has nobody else from the XEmacs team.  Which is the reason we, as
the package developers, are trying to find a tolerable way to do the
work for you.

> You're not interested in cooperation, fine.

Last time I looked, "cooperation" did not mean one party doing all the
work in the manner prescribed by another party.

> Do your thing your way, we'll do our thing our way.

If you actually did your thing your way, that would be dandy.  The
problem is that you want us to do your thing your way.  We already do
your thing, just not your way.  And that is not because of spite and
malice, but because your way does not fit our procedures which have to
cater for more than just XEmacs.

Whatever.  At least this thread has made clear that the only sensible
thing _we_ can reasonably do for the sake of XEmacs users is to
provide a standalone package for download and install.  It is a pity
that your policies prohibit you from distributing it, but after all,
it is your own foot you are shooting.

I'll probably come back here to ask how to properly produce a
"package-index" file that would permit XEmacs users to access our
distribution site with the XEmacs package browser.

Thanks for making XEmacs what it is,

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum