Re: EmacsW32 invocation options

[David Kastrup]

"Juanma Barranquero" <lekktu@gmail.com> writes:

> On 5/5/07, David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> wrote:
>
>> No, he forbids changes that would give Windows an advantage beneath
>> Emacs over GNU/Linux or other free systems.
>>
>> "I would not be using Windows if it were not for Emacs" is no outcome
>> he is interested in.  I can follow him on that.
>
> He didn't want a patch to make Emacs act as a COM server. It's hard
> to think that many people would say "I would not be using Windows if
> it were not for Emacs being a COM server".

"I would not be using Windows if it wasn't the only platform where I
could seamlessly integrate Emacs into my desktop" is quite likely.
After all, that's the whole point of making it a COM server.  So
instead of making it a Windows-only application server, I find it
legitimate to demand a solution that won't work Windows-only and might
very well _block_ a clean implementation of, say, CORBA because of
Windows-only design decisions.

>> I also find it disconcerting if programmers enjoying the benefits
>> of free software don't bother helping anybody else reaping the
>> benefits of benefitting from their adaptations.  It always has been
>> one goal of free software to be available to as many people as
>> possible, and the "I cater for myself, let everybody else cater for
>> themselves" stance is not particularly helpful when 90% of
>> potential users are actually using non-free systems.
>
> Sorry, you lost me here. I don't see how this applies to the
> discussion. Could you please elaborate?

If 90% of Emacs functionality worked only on Windows, it would be
pretty useless for promoting free software.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum