Re: [AUCTeX-devel] Re: concerns in the documentation

[David Kastrup]

Ralf Angeli <address@hidden> writes:

> * Didier Verna (2006-09-06) writes:
>
>> David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
>>
>>> It would be a sign of courtesy to at least correct those if nothing
>>> else.  In particular the bug reporting address in
>>> TeX-submit-bug-report in tex.el.
>>
>>         OK, will do.
>
> The address should probably be something like
> "address@hidden", because that's what
> people will get to hear in 90% of all bug reports coming from an
> outdated AUCTeX installation.

So what?  We can prepare a form letter for that purpose.  At least I
don't have the moderation and reply-address change hassle which is
really a big nuisance.  And it means that we can finally close down
the AUCTeX mailing list nonsense and Sunsite.dk terminally in a year
or so.

> I'd really be in favor of removing AUCTeX from the XEmacs package
> repository if it cannot be updated.

Well yes, but that is a much larger and invasive change and somebody
would need to feel responsible enough to do it.  AUCTeX is definitely
not the only area of bit rot in XEmacs; there will always be someone
to complain when his favorite package, however broken, falls out of
sumo.  In contrast to other such areas, however, upstream would at
least be providing a maintained working alternative (according to our
abilities; but our track record has not been really worse than that of
the XEmacs-maintained AUCTeX), the question is just how people would
get to know that.

It is just a pity that there is no useful way of getting that
knowledge into the XEmacs package manager, short of AUCTeX providing a
complete XEmacs package mirror, just with AUCTeX replaced.

And I really don't think that a good idea.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum