| 1 |
Hi, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o>: |
| 4 |
> > Seeing as this is an editor and a "GTK+ based simple text editor" I |
| 5 |
> > doubt it has much claim to emacs-ness. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> why does this matter ? if an application includes optional support |
| 8 |
> for an "emacs skin" such that it includes emacs |
| 9 |
> bindings/shortcuts/whatever, it sounds to me like USE=emacs is |
| 10 |
> appropriate. ive seen random applications that have different |
| 11 |
> keybinding modes have the default set, and then optional vi or emacs |
| 12 |
> to select from so that things behave as such users would expect. -mike |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
We have USE=xemacs and emacs...and the key bindings for above editor |
| 15 |
will switch to something that is also compatible with XEmacs. So why |
| 16 |
shouldn't one choose USE=xemacs here? We, XEmacs and GNU Emacs team, |
| 17 |
understand "our" USE flags as integration with said editors not |
| 18 |
something to mimick their behaviour. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
V-Li |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
-- |
| 23 |
Christian Faulhammer, Gentoo Lisp project |
| 24 |
<URL:http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/lisp/>, #gentoo-lisp on FreeNode |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
<URL:http://www.faulhammer.org/> |
Archives