Re: Emacs: Problems of the Scratch Buffer

[Chiron]

On Sat, 21 Apr 2012 18:34:03 +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:

>> From: Chiron <chiron613.no.spam.@no.spam.please.gmail.com> Date: Sat,
>> 21 Apr 2012 14:46:07 GMT
>> 
>> On Sat, 21 Apr 2012 17:10:48 +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> 
>> >> From: Chiron <chiron613.no.spam.@no.spam.please.gmail.com> Date:
>> >> Sat, 21 Apr 2012 12:43:45 GMT
>> >> 
>> >> In what way do the maintainers of emacs benefit from having more
>> >> users?
>> > 
>> > If you ever maintained a package that others used, you must know that
>> > satisfying your users is a very powerful incentive.  Frankly, I'm
>> > surprised to see this question asked at all.
>> 
>> Well, I'm just going by the behavior of the current maintainers.
> 
> What behavior?  Facts, please.
> 
The decision of the maintainers not to implement certain changes.  Kindly 
refer to earlier posts in this thread for more information.

>> They aren't making the changes that people seem to want - at least not
>> the ones that might gather lots of users.
> 
> Which changes?  Facts, please!
> 
Refer to earlier posts in this thread.  The specific change wasn't the 
issue.  The issue was whether someone who wants emacs to be different 
should expect someone else, who hasn't expressed such a desire, to make 
the changes.  And, by extension, whether the maintainers have the right 
to *not* make changes, even if making those changes might attract lots of 
new users.

>> Satisfying users may be a powerful incentive, but it certainly is not
>> the only one.  Apparently, it is not the one that motivates the current
>> maintainers.
> 
> Without the facts to back this up, I would not consider this
> "conclusion" valid.

It's not a "conclusion."  It's an opinion.  My opinion is based on what I 
see, which is a very limited subset of what occurs.  There is no 
particular reason for you to accept this opinion.

You're certainly entitled to your opinion.  I think you have mistaken my 
comments for those of someone else.  It may be helpful to review the 
thread to see what I was originally responding to.

In case I have been unclear, I am not criticizing the current maintainers 
of emacs.  I am supporting their right to make or not make changes in 
emacs, as they see fit.

I feel that for some reason people are not understanding what I am 
saying.  I'd like to blame it on the reader, but since it's more than 
one, I have to wonder whether I'm simply not getting my points across.  I 
don't know what more I can do about it, if the fault is with me.  And if 
by some chance the fault isn't with me, there really isn't anything for 
me to do.


-- 
To find a friend one must close one eye; to keep him -- two.
                -- Norman Douglas