1. 42
  1. 6

    Can someone explain to me what this is supposed to be, an Emacs fork with a few changes that the maintainer refuses to merge?

    1. 6

      Pretty much, yeah. The gnu emacs maintainers seem to be very opposed to certain kinds of features, and so some forks spring forth that add those. Maybe having tree-sitter integrated well will make a difference, who knows.

      1. 10

        This fork could become huge:

        • Upstream Emacs changes are included.
        • No political bullshit reasons for not merging changes that the FSF is against.
        • No silly FSF requirement for signing over copyright (which is an administrative burden and deterrent).
        • Easier PR workflow for people more used to “modern” style of contributing through GitHub.

        Those last two would make drive-by contributions from one-time contributors much easier and more likely, which might make small but important quality of life improvements more likely to land. The second point could potentially make this fork better in technical ways (see the Gnus nonblocking and GC improvement that have been merged already).

        1. 3

          As the core Emacs user seems to be unwilling to make any changes to the default configuration, I doubt that this will get any real traction. Which is sad.

          1. 6

            Maybe, maybe not. It’s largely forgotten at this point, but Xemacs was used by a whole bunch of people for a decade or so. And the fact that lots of people used it was a major part of why mainline Emacs adopted a bunch of changes.

            Can that same pattern work again? I think it’s worth a shot.

            1. 4

              Yeah, I was thinking this fork could become the next Xemacs.

              The same pattern also worked with egcs (the non-GNU gcc fork). I wonder if there are other such cases where the FSF’s hand was basically forced.

    2. 4

      Gnus is rewritten to be non-blocking.

      Huh. That’s why I stopped using Gnus, many years ago.

      1. 3

        This is what I aspire every build and readme to be!

        1. 3

          As much as I dislike the conservatism of GNU Emacs development (and official GNU development in general), I don’t like this either. I’m not sure why; it just rubs me the wrong way.