Xref: utzoo gnu.emacs.help:1523 comp.emacs:10371
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!unreplyable!garbage
From: tiemann@CYGNUS.COM (Michael Tiemann)
Newsgroups: gnu.emacs.help,comp.emacs
Subject: Compress
Message-ID: <9103212328.AA01645@cygnus.com>
Date: 21 Mar 91 23:28:18 GMT
References: <9103212300.AA16511@hpnmd.hp.com>
Sender: daemon@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu
Reply-To: tiemann@cygnus.com
Followup-To: gnu.emacs.help
Distribution: world
Organization: Cygnus Support, Palo Alto CA; Phone +1 415 322 3811
Lines: 64


   Date: Thu, 21 Mar 91 14:52:53 PST
   From: darrylo@hpnmxx.hp.com

   RMS says:

   > In my own work, I'm not going to install support for using compress as
   > long as it's something we can't safely use.  Some people advise not
   > worrying about the issue, which means counting on it to be bypassed
   > before it becomes acute.  But this seems risky and unwise to me.

   [ Normally, I'd keep my mouth shut, as (1) I like the FSF, (2)
     this topic doesn't belong here, and (3) I really don't have the time
     to write a reply.  However, I can't pass this up. ]

	RMS says that we should not use compress.  Well, that's fine, but
   we do not yet have a good replacement.  Until the FSF releases "GNU file
   reduction" or whatever, people will continue to use compress, and
   they'll continue to use compress, and they'll continue to use compress,
   ad nauseam.

Why does everybody have to wait for RMS to do something with free
software?  Why can't people take more initiative...enough that they
don't depend only on one person.

	This brings up a another "hot" topic: the "timelyness" of FSF
   software.  I'm worried that the world will pass by the FSF.

I'm worried about a related problem: the "timeliness" of people's
recognition of how they are allocating their resources.  I'm worried
that too many people will miss too many opportunities just waiting for
others to do their work for them.

	I'm sure that I am not alone when I say that I support the FSF, and
   that I really appreciate what they are doing.  However, the incredibly
   slow rate of software development is nearly unbelievable (I like to
   think of it as "legendary").  I realize that part of the problem may be
   beyond the control of the FSF, but the two biggest offenders are GNU
   Emacs and Bash.  Those people who follow the Bash saga will know what
   I'm talking about.

I don't really know.  I've been running bash for about a year, and I
love it.  Occaisionally somebody replaces my bash with a newer
version, but since I've never had a problem (well, more than one), I
don't find out until it comes up in conversation.  Of course I'm not a
power bash user, so perhaps my perspective is not that important.

	I'm not trying to insult the developers of GNU Emacs or Bash -- I
   really appreciate what they are doing.  However, I would appreciate it
   if the FSF would take MUCH MORE CARE with announcing schedules.  It's
   very, super, incredibly, unbelievably annoying when a developer says
   that program "X" will be released in a couple of weeks, and then months,
   or even years, pass by.

FSF has very little control over an amazingly large problem.  When you
consider that their total annual income is probably less than $1M,
that they are a non-profit organization, primarily devoted to serving
hackers by sharing with them, you'll realize just how unimportant the
needs of company X or company Y can appear.

Michael

Disclaimer: I work for a company that cares how company X and company Y
are having their needs met by free software.