[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: collaborative editing
From: |
tomas |
Subject: |
Re: collaborative editing |
Date: |
Sun, 7 Jun 2020 11:28:01 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) |
On Sat, Jun 06, 2020 at 11:36:35PM -0400, Richard Stallman wrote:
[...]
> I've changed it to try to separate this question from others.
Good idea, thanks!
> I have not done shared editing over the network, but lots of people do
> it -- in Etherpad and in Google Docs -- and it is clear that they
> find it useful. How about if we take for granted it is useful
> and skip the debate about that point?
I didn't take the debate as being about /whether/ it is useful, but
rather about /in which way/ it may be useful: from that angle, I think
the debate itself is useful, as it may help to guide us shaping this
feature.
Myself, I'll give Rudel a try and look into the TLS point Stefan made,
as a result of this debate.
Cheers
-- t
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
- Re: What is the most useful potential feature which Emacs lacks?, (continued)
- Re: What is the most useful potential feature which Emacs lacks?, tomas, 2020/06/06
- Re: What is the most useful potential feature which Emacs lacks?, Stefan Monnier, 2020/06/06
- Re: What is the most useful potential feature which Emacs lacks?, Thibaut Verron, 2020/06/06
- Re: What is the most useful potential feature which Emacs lacks?, Eli Zaretskii, 2020/06/06
- Re: What is the most useful potential feature which Emacs lacks?, tomas, 2020/06/06
- collaborative editing, Richard Stallman, 2020/06/06
- Re: collaborative editing,
tomas <=
- Re: What is the most useful potential feature which Emacs lacks?, Jean-Christophe Helary, 2020/06/06
Re: What is the most useful potential feature which Emacs lacks?, Karl Fogel, 2020/06/01