Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Microsoft and Xenix. | From | Michael Alan Dorman <> | Date | 23 Jun 2001 20:13:13 -0400 |
| |
Rob Landley <landley@webofficenow.com> writes: > That would be the X version of emacs. And there's the explanation > for the split between GNU and X emacs: it got forked and the > closed-source version had a vew years of divergent development > before opening back up, by which point it was very different to > reconcile the two code bases.
No, sorry, wrong, for at least a couple of reasons reasons:
1) XEmacs, being constrained to be under the same license (GPL) as its progenitor, GNU Emacs, could never have been closed-source.
2) Lucid Emacs, the version of Emacs that becamse XEmacs, was not started until ca. 1992
I refer you to http://www.jwz.org/doc/emacs-timeline.html for documentation---JWZ was Mr. Lucid Emacs for quite a time.
In 1987, there are any number of things that it could have been---I'd guess either Unipress Emacs or perhaps Gosling Emacs.
Mike. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |