Andreas Röhler <address@hidden> writes:
Which points at the underlying reasons of the problem. "Emacs hampered by
legacy code of maintainers" would by worth a study. Hopefully John knows how
to avoid that trap, which is purely social, not technical.
It's fairly easy to avoid: Be objective, professional and courteous in
analysis and discussion of issues; let evidence drive the discussion, and show
real comparisons between alternatives. If the discussion becomes too abstract,
or is based on "what other people have done in the past", then in my opinion
it lacks the force of argument.
There is no reason that personalities should have anything to do with how
Emacs grows, or which code we use or don't use. If something is objectively
better, we should consider it; if it's not, we'll stick with what works
(however badly) until that better thing comes along.
I'm willing to rip out any code that hampers us, no matter who it was written
by. Show me clear proof, borne by consensus among our developers, and we'll
push the commit to master whenever you're ready.