Re: Documentation for XEmacs users:

[Michael Albinus]

Hunter Kelly <address@hidden> writes:

> I don't know how you've structured things, but I think, from a user
> perspective, that it would be fine to just have sub-sections on the html
> page, something like:
> 
> Tramp Filename conventions
> 
> FSF GNU emacs:  
> 
>       blah blah /address@hidden:/path/to/file  blah blah
> 
> XEmacs
> 
>       blah blah /address@hidden/path/to/file blah blah

That way the page was structured in the past. But it was terrible
reading, because every example was doubled. And most of the readers
aren't interested in details for the other gang.

IMHO, the best solution would be to unify the syntax. But that
discussion has stopped a while ago ...

> I also actually think that would be fine in the info file as well,
> because whatever is currently there to switch which section is rendered,
> didn't work.  I'm using XEmacs on a RedHat 7.3 machine, and I upgraded
> my tramp package using the package facility, and there is _still_ no
> mention of different XEmacs conventions...

Hmm. Sounds like an XEmacs packaging problem. Could somebody out there
please check what happened? (I don't use the XEmacs packages, at least
until now ...)

> Thanks,
> 
> H

Best regards, Michael.