Re: Android port of Emacs

[Po Lu]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

> You are not answering any of the questions I raised.

Well, I've been reiterating the same stuff over and over, because you've
been doing the same thing.  We just don't agree on these issues, which
is why I asked Richard, a third party, to intervene.

> It is not useful to reiterate stuff you or others already wrote.  It
> doesn't advance this discussion, which is basically stagnant in the
> same spot from the first moment I started it.  No one took the issues
> I raise seriously.  Which may mean I'm imagining difficulties where
> there are none, or it may mean no one here wants to look at this issue
> through the eyes of project management.

I think that in the eyes of most people (me included), the downsides of
releasing Emacs with a port that is broken is negligible, if the port
itself is so unimportant that nobody steps up to fix it before the
release is made.  So, in fact, this is very much an imaginary issue:
either it will get fixed, or it will be broken -- and I've been trying
hard to make sure it won't be broken.  This is how most free software
treats ports to systems that aren't considered important, and is the
only proven way to remain portable while development is being undertaken
by volunteers.

Thanks.