Re: Merging multitty

[David Kastrup]

Jason Rumney <address@hidden> writes:

> David Kastrup wrote:
>
>> I disagree with that assessment.  It presumes that not making Emacs
>> multitty-capable ever is a reasonable option.
>
> It is the only option if we don't have anyone willing to maintain
> that capability. But judging from your activism on this, I don't
> expect we will have that problem.

My "activism" does not make me a Windows, DOS, or MacOSX developer, so
it would not carry the day.  While I don't remember a "horribly
broken" assessment either, it does not seem like I have the most
reliable of recollections about the details of the discussion.

I think it is more or less safe to say that it is about time to have
multitty moved into at least a branch in Emacs-CVS since development
in its own repository has IIRC been reduced mostly to synches, anyway.
Since its current version control system is arch-based, it sounds like
the way through the arch-variant of Emacs CVS that Miles proposed
would likely be the best way to do this: the person doing the move
would then work with a system he is familiar with on both ends.

-- 
David Kastrup