Re: Next release

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Dan Nicolaescu <address@hidden>
> Date: Sat, 03 May 2008 19:06:50 -0700
> Cc: Glenn Morris <address@hidden>, Chong Yidong <address@hidden>,
>       Nick Roberts <address@hidden>, address@hidden
> 
>   > It seemed to me that you just superficially removed compilation
>   > errors, with minimal test (you said that it was minimally-tested).
>   > Just like you literally replaced `next-line' with `forward-line' to
>   > remove byte-compiler warnings without considering their meanings.
> 
> Thank you yet again for your graciousness!  Again given statements like:
> 
> "As for Mac, I'm planning to quit the development of the Carbon port
> for Emacs 23, as the Cocoa/GNUstep port will replace it on that
> version.  So, personally I don't care if multitty is incompatible with
> the current Carbon code as long as it is not for Emacs 22.x (x > 1)."
> 
> and the excellent job at whining, moaning and dissing the multi-tty
> effort, coupled with no code/documentation or any other type of positive
> contribution should be appreciated as a great upper hand that can be
> used to disparage volunteer work by other people.  Marvelous!

Dan, please stop this.  All that Mitsuharu asks for is higher level of
quality for the code committed to CVS.  I think it's a reasonable
request.

You seem to assert that when faced with changes which could
potentially break other platforms, there's only two possible
alternatives: either live with the breakage or don't commit the code
at all.  But in fact, there's a 3rd alternative: learn enough about
those other platforms to make the code right on them as well.  There's
even a 4th alternative: make the new code be conditionally compiled
only on platforms you understand and can test.  All of those are IMO
better than breakage.

So I don't understand why you reject such suggestions as ``whining''.
Certainly, being the one who works on the code imposes some
responsibility on you.