From xemacs-m  Fri May  2 22:55:09 1997
Received: from crystal.WonderWorks.COM (crystal.WonderWorks.com [192.203.206.1])
	by xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id WAA28488
	for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Fri, 2 May 1997 22:55:07 -0500 (CDT)
Received: by crystal.WonderWorks.COM 
	id QQcnwp06889; Fri, 2 May 1997 23:55:06 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Fri, 2 May 1997 23:55:06 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <QQcnwp06889.199705030355@crystal.WonderWorks.COM>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Kyle Jones <kyle_jones@wonderworks.com>
To: XEmacs Developers <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>
Subject: Re: Fixing C-g; zmacs-region woes
In-Reply-To: <kigsp05q0nf.fsf@jagor.srce.hr>
References: <m2hggoqkqg.fsf@altair.xemacs.org>
	<199704302358.SAA14825@xemacs.org>
	<QQcnsv15042.199705020323@crystal.WonderWorks.COM>
	<kigsp05q0nf.fsf@jagor.srce.hr>
X-Mailer: VM 6.31 under 19.15p3 XEmacs Lucid
X-Face: /cA45WHG7jWq>(O3&Z57Y<"WsX5ddc,4c#w0F*zrV#=M
        0@~@,s;b,aMtR5Sqs"+nU.z^CSFQ9t`z2>W,S,]:[+2^
        Nbf6v4g>!&,7R4Ot4Wg{&tm=WX7P["9%a)_da48-^tGy
        ,qz]Z,Zz\{E.,]'EO+F)@$KtF&V

Hrvoje Niksic writes:
 > Kyle Jones <kyle_jones@wonderworks.com> writes:
 > [...]
 > > Please do not break my code because RMS says so.  I don't care how
 > > persuasive he is.  If he's running the show in the XEmacs camp, I am
 > > outta here.
 > 
 > Oh come on Kyle!  If RMS has an good argument, I'd like to know it.
 > If you can give an good argument, give it.  Please spare us of "RMS
 > says X, so we must do Y", which is implied by the above.

You chopped my good argument out of the citation; that is,
maintaining compatibility with an existing, documented interface.
But hey, RMS thinks it's a great idea to knock the legs out from
under XEmacs application developers, so it must be a great idea,
right?  Why would RMS lead us astray?  He loves us so much!

It hasn't been that long since I wrote (hypothetically)

   "What's the point of writing for XEmacs, they'll just change
   things to sync with FSF Emacs and break your code anyway."

This wasn't supposed to be prophecy.

If RMS has a good idea, great.  He's full of good ideas; you'll
never hear me argue otherwise.  But don't forget that XEmacs has
a history and a user base of its own.  RMS probably doesn't give
a flying chili-bean fart about that, but those of us who try to
support XEmacs had better consider it.  That is, if we want
XEmacs to remain a viable independent project and not just cling
remora-like to FSF Emacs.

