Re: Release plans

[Lennart Borgman (gmail)]

A Soare wrote:
> > > Quite so! Investing energy to develop it under Windows is (almost) loss of 
> > > energy!
> > Yes, I understood that this is what you meant. But in what way did you 
> > reach this conclusion?
> By induction. I do not use Windows, and in linux I use emacs for lots of 
> purposes.
So you mean that for you personal benefits there is no use in developing 
Emacs under Windows? ;-)
> > > I know a few cases of _good_ programmers at google, microsoft, etc that never 
> > > thought to use emacs.
> > >
> > > The reason: Windows has nicer environments to write C++, Delphi, C# etc. (that 
> > > is what they told me).
> > Then how can it be good to develop Emacs under any operating system?
> In Emacs under Linux for Linux!
Did you mention any reason that I did not notice?

> > > That is what peuple does not like : to make effort to understand something that 
> > > they can have without energy.
> > Don't you think that those programmers did invest quite a lot of effort 
> > in understanding the software they are using now?
> Friend and collegueas: yes, they had good marks at the faculty. They deposed 
> much effort to learn.
Thanks.

> > > Emacs and Linux is used just by peuple that wants to understand how things work.
> > Do you say that there is no use for Emacs?
> In windows, yes, that is what I say. In Windows it is completely unuseful.
Then why is there a use for it under Linux? It seems like you are saying 
that software under Linux is inferior to the corresponding software 
under Windows and because of this Emacs can be useful on Linux.
If that is the case why is it Emacs we develop and not something better?

> > > Windows is used by peuple that want to gain money and to arrive quiqkly at 
> > > their purpose.
> > Do you say that using Emacs makes it take long time to do things?
> It takes little time when you have already learned how to use it.
> The first time when you did a thing, you will never choose something 
different.
> Here is the point: the psychology. Peuple prefers never to make the 
first effort,
> and they prefer to use something to arrive quickly at the point.

Can we use that point to do something actively? Can we make Emacs better 
in a way that it satisfies those people's need? (Still not sacrifiying 
other things.)
> > > >From all my experience (all what I saw), windows interface for 
>>> > emacs is as important as the file ./etc/sex.6 in emacs' sources.
> > Are you saying that this is the only part of Emacs that we should keep ;-)
> Yes, Emacs in Linux is nice.
Why is the file etc/sex.6 so nice so that we should keep only that on 
Linux? ;-)