Re: AW: [h-e-w] EmacsW32, gnuserv, pathes in .emacs

[David Vanderschel]

On Tuesday, July 11, "Eli Zaretskii" <address@hidden> wrote:
>Please, let's not proliferate forked efforts!  If the
>Emacs FAQ lacks important Windows-specific
>information, let us add it there, instead of wasting
>our limited resources on maintaining as yet another
>separate source of information.

Since the Windows FAQ for Emacs has been around at
gnu.org for a good long time, I don't see how making
it better could be regarded as a "forked effort".
What I perceive as a forking of this sort of
information is the Win32 stuff to be found in the
Emacs Wiki.

>The NTEmacs FAQ was invented because Emacs on Windows
>initially had so many deviant behaviors that it was
>almost impossible to set it up in a reasonable
>fashion without extra tools, tricks, and tips.  Most,
>if not all, of those problems should be gone now, I
>think.  That is why the NTEmacs FAQ is outdated:
>there was no good reason to update it, as many items
>there are simply not needed anymore.

This is the first call I have seen to completely
abandon the Windows FAQ.  If the problem is that it
contains information which is no longer necessary or
relevant, then cleaning the junk out should not be
such a problem.  It appears that Eli is advocating
merging what's left into the regular Emacs FAQ.  What
concerns me about this is that the regular Emacs FAQ
seems to be even farther out of date than the Windows
FAQ.  We could be talking about different things; but
what I know to be the "Emacs FAQ" may be found here:
http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/emacs-faq.text 
And it says, "This is the GNU Emacs FAQ, last updated
on 26 October 2001."  The last update on the Windows
FAQ was less than 2 months ago.

>If someone thinks that there are still many
>Windows-specific issues to be covered in the FAQ,
>please tell what are those issues.  I'd be surprised
>to learn there's lots to be said that cannot be found
>in the manual, but even if I'm wrong, there's no
>reason not to add that to the Emacs FAQ, which comes
>with the distribution and therefore will always be up
>to date.

Then how come it is not up to date on the gnu.org Web
site? 

Regards,
  David V.