On 5/4/07, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
(He might be better off choosing a less radical word than
``destructive'', but then he's not a native English speaker, so we all
might cut him some slack.)
I should've said "not productive", but I was mimicking the use of
"destructive" in one of Lennart's answers to you.
In this case, Lennart's attitude to put into his distribution every
patch he finds useful, but cannot convince the Emacs developers to
accept, is IMO not the best use of that freedom. It is confusing to
users who expect Emacs to behave as documented and to do that
consistently on all platforms. And it's an attitude that smells of
schism and forking, which many of us will not approve, because it
diminishes the already small group of active developers by spreading
their insufficient resources between several competing projects.
You've nicely summarized the main points of the discussion. Thanks.