From xemacs-m  Thu Mar 20 15:36:13 1997
Received: from cs.sunysb.edu (sbcs.sunysb.edu [130.245.1.15])
	by xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id PAA17524
	for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Thu, 20 Mar 1997 15:36:12 -0600 (CST)
Received: from sbkifer.cs.sunysb.edu (sbkifer.cs.sunysb.edu [130.245.1.35]) by cs.sunysb.edu (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id QAA03217; Thu, 20 Mar 1997 16:45:11 -0500
Message-Id: <199703202145.QAA03217@cs.sunysb.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: sbcs.cs.sunysb.edu: Host sbkifer.cs.sunysb.edu didn't use HELO protocol
From: kifer@CS.SunySB.EDU (Michael Kifer)
To: sperber@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de (Michael Sperber [Mr. Preprocessor])
Cc: xemacs-beta@xemacs.org
Subject: Re: efs-patches is terminally broken 
In-reply-to: "Michael Sperber [Mr. Preprocessor]" of 20 Mar 1997 14:14:40 +0100
             <y9l913in1rz.fsf@modas.informatik.uni-tuebingen.de> 
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 1997 16:32:55 -0500
Sender: kifer@CS.SunySB.EDU



> I *did* acknowledge Michael's complaint, and I *will* deal with it
> tomorrow.  Apparently the acknowledgement never got through.

Michael, sorry for that. I don't remember getting the acknowledgement, but
then again it could have been lost.

> 
> I also *will* debug Steve's problem.  It's merely that that last mail
> is the first concrete account of the problem, and a description of how
> to reproduce it.  I have not seen it yet (despite debugging code and
> using Gnus all the time), and therefore had *no way* of addressing the
> problem until Steve's mail.

I thought I sent two concrete examples...


> I'm moderately frustrated that it seems to be expected that every
> single problem report gets fixed right away, and that if it's not
> something is "not ready for integration". 
> What are the serious consequences of the
> problem Michael reported?  (It *is* the defadvice thing, isn't it.)

I first reported this on Feb 13. The problem is that this makes dired-like
functionality unusable to all Viper users. (And Viper is key to the emacs
strategy to take over the world :-)

I saw Sudish's msg saying he doesn't have the problem between efs and
viper, but I believe he is using a version of viper he specifically patched
to get rid of a piece of functionality that clashes with efs.


> Personally, I think the EFS integration has caused way less problem
> reports than I thought it would

unless your fingers are trained on vi...


	cheers
	  --michael  

