Re: Microsoft and Xenix.

[Michael Alan Dorman]

Rob Landley <[e-mail]> 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.