81–90 of 181 posts
2) It's perfectly okay (and good) that they want their software to behave consistently across platforms, as otherwise those are not really cross-platform.
3) Coloured typeface are illogical, just use pictures, which is what emoji are. It's fairly easy to insert images into a buffer in Emacs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Upstream GNU Emacs can no more be called "crippled" on macOS than it can be called "crippled" on linux, because on neither does it support multi-color emoticons. Maybe it seems "unfair" because macOS users could easily have the feature advantage over a free/libre OS user, but upstream GNU Emacs denies macOS the advantage. It is kind of funny. But also funny because GNU's adherence to their licensing philosophy means…
From the original article, Emacs had this feature, and then they removed it. That's crippling it. Deciding not to implement the feature in the first place, well, that's a reasonable decision given their desire for functionality to be cross-platform. But accepting it, then turning around and removing it later even though it was already implemented, that's just spite.
If crippled is a broken spine, then this is preventing some people from wearing a funny badge until everyone can wear funny badges.
This kind of thing is exactly why I will always support and use Mitsuharu Yamamoto's macOS Emacs port ( https://bitbucket.org/mituharu/emacs-mac ), which has been consistently rock solid and committed to implementing nice to haves on macOS that this sort of political bullshit holds back on official development. Homebrew tap here: https://github.com/railwaycat/homebrew-emacsmacport
he is the author of the commit http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git/commit/?id=934461...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Deliberately crippling your product on Apple platforms does not in any way "remind users that it is not in agreement with Apple's treatment of its users". In fact, it's fairly ironic that, in an attempt to protest someone else's treatment of users, Emacs has decided to treat its users badly. Deliberately crippling Emacs will not make Apple change, and will not get people to switch away from Apple platforms. But what…
is removing multicolor font support crippling emacs?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You should not identify yourself with Apple's operating system. If I want I will identify myself with whatever I decide to identify myself with; I don't really care about Apple, but now you've turned it into a matter of principle, moralizing what people shouldn't do. You should not identify yourself with GNU/Linux. How did you like that? How about identifying oneself with JustWorks(SM), vertical integration, and thin…
I've always identified with ProDOS.
http://donhopkins.com/home/archive/emacs/skull-and-crossbone...
20 years ago the FSF had some very forward-looking ideas. Now we have the ornery opinion of old men - it was good enough for us two decades ago, it's good enough for you now. The point of free as in speech and not free as in beer is that the choice you make does not need to be right or wrong by the standards of other humans. Holding back technology because it's not available on "your" platform is just as monopolistic…
The point of free as in speech and not free as in beer is that the choice you make does not need to be right or wrong by the standards of other humans. No, it may be yours, but I'm pretty sure that was never the FSF's point. Not now, and not 20 years ago. Holding back technology because it's not available on "your" platform is just as monopolistic as any corporate entity they have butted heads with. - It's not "their…
If it's not "their" platform then how is it available elsewhere? If other distributors have access and can make it available then it is very much a GNU political standard and not a side effect the technology.
How are those platforms free if existing features have been removed due to politics? I stand by my point, 20 years ago the FSF was a foundation that wanted to make technology available to all - without having to worry about IP ownership. They have removed a feature that was technically sound due to it's status as a commercial work. How am I free to use this if I can only do so in designated zones?
As a product developer, maintaining a consistent feature set across OSes makes perfect sense to me. It is a struggle to get consistent behavior across different versions of Windows, let alone entirely different OS types.
That's not the reason that has been given here - there was no claim that the technology was difficult to bring up to current spec. The reason was that non-GNU platforms had better font handling and now that's not allowed for a GNU project.
[1] http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2016/03/enable-color-emoji-linux-...