[AUCTeX-devel] Re: Changes in font locking

[David Kastrup]

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

> David Kastrup writes:
>
>  > You conveniently snipped the end of the sentence:
>  > 
>  >     for an XEmacs developer with CVS access.
>  > 
>  > Do you really consider this sort of creative editing appropriate
>  > behavior?
>
> Indeed I do!

I have my doubts that your standards of conduct are to the best of
XEmacs.

> Your previous post was an ad hominem attack,

Aren't they all?  That's probably why I have to mark at least half of
them with "<rant>" tags as you claim.  How about supporting either
claim in a believable manner?

> implying that the irrelevant personal status of "XEmacs developer"
> imposes some kind of duty on me that doesn't apply equally well to
> (eg) you.  I chose to ignore the attack, and focus on the content.

You have the CVS readily available, checked out, and in a state
allowing not just C-x v g, but also checking any needed change in.  I
have neither time nor disk space nor interest to check out a copy of
XEmacs.

> I think it might very well be useful if someone would use cvs
> annotate on the relevant library, and look at the ChangeLog, to
> investigate who put the call to `copy-syntax-table' in, and ask them
> if they would explain why.  Would somebody with an interest in
> fixing the bug in with-syntax-table like to do that?

It is not like you have not been sent a patch and explanation several
times on this list, by several parties on several occasions.

That is another reason why an XEmacs developer is required here:
people without write access just get ignored, abused or both.

-- 
David Kastrup