The technical term is “recession”

The US being the one that showeth us the way of the fall that cometh huh?

Seems entirely tangential? It shouldn’t be a race to the bottom…

Indeed it shouldn't. We are herd animals.

... You have no idea how the internet works do you. Why are you here?

Well aren’t you a treat!

The question was what was their logic, how could they possibly believe these inconsistent things, so I’m offering what their logic might be. Not mine.

But even if it was what I think, your response is rude and thoughtless. I would like to imagine you can do better.

Simple. The former is economic warfare against the US, under pretense of the EU “parliament” giving a hoot about its constituents. The latter is plain old fascism.

This is basically the only reply that everyone on this thread should read. Thanks for your research.

That is a correct and fair assessment of the impact, assuming the change lands in a release as-is (which apparently it won't: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2023-12/msg00... )

The “or maybe not?” part of the message you are replying to, tells me that someone got told.

Forking Emacs on such grounds is a symptom of ego malfunction. The proper step (after diplomacy has failed, which it hasn't yet in this instance) is to author an alternate implementation of the feature in Emacs Lisp and publish it.

Your alternate implementation would have to monkey patch the shipped code. That is a fork in disguise.

Not to repeat myself: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38604600

The easiest way to produce a monkey patch for Emacs which reverts some behavior would be to maintain your own private fork of the repo, where you do a proper job of rebasing, resolving conflicts and validating. Then from that you take the necessary files (all the files that are different from upstream) and produce the hot-load that can be distributed to people. But, totally not a fork, man!

I have a hard time putting faith in that “balkanization theory” from the '90s anymore. A fork gains traction if and only if it manages to get ahead of the mainline feature-wise, and stay there, by a sufficiently wide margin for customers to overcome their inertia. We'll see whether this ~eshel person manages to pull that off, or not (my money is on “not”.)

Can you please substantiate that point?