Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

From the blog post, I couldn't really tell what the author's long term intentions were for his fork.

Maybe just to persuade the mainline maintainers?



Forking Emacs on such grounds is a symptom of ego malfunction. The proper step (after diplomacy has failed, which it hasn't yet in this instance) is to author an alternate implementation of the feature in Emacs Lisp and publish it.


Your alternate implementation would have to monkey patch the shipped code. That is a fork in disguise.

Not to repeat myself: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38604600

The easiest way to produce a monkey patch for Emacs which reverts some behavior would be to maintain your own private fork of the repo, where you do a proper job of rebasing, resolving conflicts and validating. Then from that you take the necessary files (all the files that are different from upstream) and produce the hot-load that can be distributed to people. But, totally not a fork, man!




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: