Re: RFC: Flavors - naming significant sets of customizations

[Emanuel Berg]

Rustom Mody writes:

>> I still don't understand what a "large
>> customization" is, or is supposed to be.
>
> Standard (and contentious) example: cua.
>
> Current cua-mode is a hack.  If someone wants cua
> *keybindings* with standard emacs *functionality* he is
> out of luck because this requires deep surgery on all
> modes -- moving out C-x and C-c to some other keys.

So what are you saying, someone would perform that deep
surgery (to get a non-hack cua), and this would be an
Emacs "suite"?

That doesn't really synch with those examples
Jambunathan K provided. Those actually sound exactly
like the Linux distros: repackage the same thing (over
and over again) based on the different behaviour of the
(segmented) user base.

Let me give you an actual example, and you tell me if
this is a good idea.

In the current issue of "Linux Magazine" (a magazine
that, by the way, dropped their entire "letters"
section the moment I started writing to them), anyway
in that issue there is a review of the latest "new"
Linux distro: openArtist.

openArtist is based on Ubuntu. (They didn't mention
that Ubuntu, in turn, is a Debian derivative.) The
reviewer noted the following.

* openArtist uses GNOME 3 as the desktop suite, only,
  it is in the "GNOME 2 mode".
* The desktop has a black-and-gray color theme. (!)
* Contrary to the Ubuntu philosophy (one tool per area
  of computer activity), openArtist provides lots of
  tools for various purposes within the artistic field.

And so the reviewer notes: as there are so many tools
provided, openArtist is probably most likely to attract
"advanced users".

I mean: Completely and utterly *outrageous*! I whole
f-ing distro just to make GNOME 3 look like GNOME 2, to
set the background to black, and to install various
tools - installing, a *one-liner* with aptitude! And
after that, they dare say this is something for
"advanced users"!

And then just think of all the superstructure work that
has to be done managing a distro - homepage, mailing
lists, policy decisions, etc. etc. (And if you think
I'm exaggerating, just pick up the magazine at your
local public library and read it for yourself.)

Can anyone tell me why we should do this for Emacs?

We should do *new* things (or *improve* things), and
not rebrand, repackage, etc. what is already here!

-- 
Emanuel Berg, programmer-for-rent. CV, projects, etc at uXu
underground experts united:  http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573