Re: flyspell bug

[Juri Linkov]

>     ispell.el shouldn't insist on using "aspell" instead of "ispell"
>     even when aspell executable happens to be in exec-path.
>
> Of course it should.  aspell is a GNU package.
>
> What led you to think the contrary?

I had the impression that the intention was to fix a problem of using
aspell with ispell.el.  However, the installed change is too radical.
It affects all users of ispell having aspell in exec-path.

If switching from ispell to aspell was intentional (I can't find
a discussion about this on emacs-devel) then we need to document
it in the NEWS file with a warning about possible problems, to inform
maintainers of ispell.el and aspell about this change asking them to
update documentation, web pages, and to test aspell dictionaries
to confirm their compatibility with ispell.el.

But perhaps switching from ispell to aspell was too hasty change.
According to aspell's TODO list, ispell.el is not quite ready for
using aspell.  The Info node (info "(aspell)Important Items") has:

  Things that need to be done
  ---------------------------

     * Enhance *ispell.el* so that it will work better with GNU Aspell.
       _[In Progress]_.

I don't know what is the current status of this TODO item.

-- 
Juri Linkov
http://www.jurta.org/emacs/