Greetings. Salaam. This is Mohsen Banan.
I am a software and internet engineer.
The title of this presentation is "About Blee".
Blee stands for
ByStar Libre-Halaal Emacs Environment.
In this presentation I want to look
at Emacs as a primary ingredient for the usage
environment of an autonomy and morality
directed digital ecosystem.
My focus here is not just Emacs.
This is about augmenting Emacs in the context of
our own specific digital ecosystem.
This presentation is part theoretical
and part practical.
I spend about half of my time on the
theory and the bigger picture.
The second half is hands on and Emacs centric.
Emacs has long been recognized as the ultimate
integration platform, enabling the creation of an
unparalleled user environment.
Tomohiro is right on the mark when he says:
"The reason why Emacs platform is good
is that it cooperates with OS,
not because it is good by itself."
But this recognition has often been in the
context of a generic and abstract "OS"
So, I am updating MATSUYAMA's observation as:
"The reason why Emacs platform is good is that
it facilitates creation of specific integrated
usage environments like Blee, which cooperate
with Debian and BISOS as part of
the Libre-Halaal ByStar Digital Ecosystem."
Emacs is an especially good choice as the universal core of
user environments of a digital ecosystem, because it has an
incredibly powerful display engine, and an incredibly
powerful Elisp engine, and an incredibly powerful input
methods engine, and an incredibly powerful common agents
paradigm, and a very rich set of mature and convivial idioms
and means for absorption and integration of external
software services continuum capabilities.
In our model, we first augment Emacs with a set
of cohesive elisp capabilities and create Blee --
ByStar Libre-Halaal Emacs Environment.
We then further enhance Blee with an integrated
framework on top of Debian called BISOS ---
ByStar Internet Services Operating System.
Blee is inherently intertwined
and integrated with BISOS.
This combination of the universal BISOS and Blee
then forms a foundation for creation of an
autonomy directed digital ecosystem that we call
ByStar.
Over the past two decades, I have been working on
creating a comprehensive, interdisciplinary, and
non-proprietary digital ecosystem.
We call it ByStar (By*).
ByStar challenges the existing
proprietary American digital ecosystem
while operating concurrently alongside it.
ByStar's primary offerings are tangible autonomy
and genuine privacy on a very large scale.
By* is about redecentralization of internet
application services.
The * in ByStar stands for Unix's globing symbol.
Signifying that our scope is everything.
Blee is a bigger and different vision for Emacs.
Let's compare and contrast
what I am proposing against
common current practices of the Emacs culture.
Please permit me to be slightly cynical.
Much of what we have been seeing in the
Emacs culture and in emacsConf
can be characterized as
stories of tunnel vision engineers
scratching various itches
by integrating various capabilities
and providing DIY recipes.
Emacs and Lisp are so powerful that
people have come up
with catch phrases like the
"Curse of Lisp".
The curse is that
the power of Lisp breeds individualism.
Because you can be so powerful alone,
you work longer alone.
Because it is easy to spin
your own whatever library,
many people do.
I am suggesting that we should raise the bar.
Let's cultivate Emacs in the context
of our own digital ecosystem instead.
Do more and do more outside of Emacs and
recognize that a well integrated
smaller Emacs leads to a better usage environment.
Broadly speaking, digital ecosystems are viewed
as consisting of 4 parts.
Ideology, Software, Services and Content.
Software, Services and Content are polyexistentials
and can be analyzed from 3 different aspects:
Functionality, Usage and Manner-of-Existence.
By "manner-of-existence" of polyexistentials
we mean everything relating to how the
polyexistential exists within society.
This includes for example,
are polyexistentials internally transparent?
Societal ideology determines manner-of-existence
of Software, Services and Content.
And in turn, manner-of-existence of Software,
Services and Content impacts society.
In the American model,
loss of privacy and autonomy are direct
consequences of the IPR regime.
Based on this characterization, let's consider
these three Digital Ecosystems:
the Proprietary American Digital Ecosystem,
FOSS and ByStar.
The 5 big American proprietary tech companies,
Google, Microsoft, Apple, Facebook and Amazon
have created 5 competing enclaves as mostly
separate and isolated digital ecosystem.
In this slide, I am focusing on the first 3
and each of their OSs,
their usage environments
and their clouds.
Let's clearly recognize that the economic model
of these proprietary digital ecosystems is
"Surveillance Capitalism".
Now, let's focus on
the right side of this picture.
On the non-proprietary side,
based on the FOSS model,
we have ended up with lots of components.
We have Debian as a platform,
we have Emacs as
an editor-centered usage environment.
But on the non-proprietary side we don't have
anything that can
reasonably be considered a digital ecosystem.
I mean, the services aspect is missing.
ByStar aspires to be
a complete non-proprietary digital ecosystem.
We were all born into the belief system of
intellectual property rights,
making it exceedingly difficult for us
to even imagine that this
foundational ownership framework
could be fundamentally flawed.
I am delighted to announce the availability of my
recent book,
"Nature of Polyexistentials".
The full title of my book is:
Nature of Polyexistentials
Basis for Abolishment of the
Western Intellectual Property Rights Regime
And Introduction of
the Libre-Halaal ByStar Digital Ecosystem.
Knowledge, know-how, uses of know-how, ideas,
formulas, software and information are inherently
non-scarce.
They are polyexistentials.
Unlike monoexistentials which exist in singular,
polyexistentials naturally exist in multiples.
What is abundant in nature is being made
artificially scarce through man-made ownership
rules called copyright and patents.
Let me provide a brief overview.
This book is divided into five parts,
each representing a layer of interest to you
and to our societal policymakers.
Part I, the philosophical layer
delves into the concept of polyexistence.
In this part, I introduce,
for the very first time,
the concepts and terminology of "polyexistentials".
The topic of restriction of polyexistentals
and the Western IPR is one and the same.
Comprehending polyexistence invalidates
the Western IPR model.
We are living inside of an ownership fallacy.
The Western IPR regime is a sin of our times.
Part II is the pathology layer.
Over the course of the past two centuries,
numerous theories have been proposed to justify
intellectual property.
In this Part, I offer
my perspective on the weaknesses inherent
in each of these theories.
Part III, the ethics layer,
focuses on contours of cures.
Having dismissed the Western intellectual
property rights regime as an erroneous
governance model for polyexistentials,
I propose the
Libre-Halaal model of governance of polyexistentials
towards facilitating conviviality of tools.
Part IV, the engineering layer, introduces the
Libre-Halaal ByStar Digital Ecosystem.
as an ethical alternative to the prevailing
proprietary American digital ecosystem.
Part V, the sociology layer,
delves into formulation of
Libre-Halaal oriented societal policies.
It is evident that the abolition of intellectual
property carries significant consequences.
In this Part, I present my thoughts on this
particular dimension for Eastern societies.
For Western societies I confine myself to
inside of IPR strategies.
You can think of this book as being in two volumes.
Our focus is Blee in Volume II.
But as our blueprint needs to be interdisciplinary,
there are some key concepts of Volume I that I'll
briefly discuss here.
Volume I deals with the general concept of
polyexistence and invalidity of IPR.
In Chapter 11, I introduce the very sensitive and potent
vocabulary of Halaal and Libre-Halaal.
Volume II is backed by software and internet
services.
The contents of this book
belong to all of humanity
and verbatim copying of it is unrestricted.
If you want to read it, this book is yours.
The "Nature of Polyexistentials" book is
available both online and in print.
This book is available as two editions.
The US Edition and the International edition.
The US Edition is written with
a slightly milder Western unfriendly tone,
while the International Edition
includes additional original content in Farsi.
I consider the International Edition to be the
authoritative version.
However, many readers in
the US and Western countries
may prefer the US Edition.
I maintain separate Git repositories
for each edition on GitHub.
US Edition is at bxplpc/120033 and
International Edition is at bxplpc/120074
Cloning these repositories will give you access
to the book in PDF format (suitable for both A4
and US Letter printing) and in EPUB format.
Alternatively, the content can be downloaded
directly from your browser without needing to
clone the repositories.
To ensure broader online availability and
stability, I have also published the book on
Zenodo, complete with a
DOI (Digital Object Identifier).
You can download both the A4 and
8.5 x 11 PDFs from there as well.
The book is also available in print on Amazon and
at most major bookstores in
the US and Western regions.
The ISBNs for both editions
are included in this slide.
Additionally, I have published
this book in Iran through Jangal Publishers.
I did not write this book for profit.
My aim is to share my thoughts
and encourage readers to
engage with my views and ideas.
Your feedback is welcome, and
I am genuinely interested in
hearing your perspectives.
In Western markets, I have priced the print
edition somewhat above production costs.
If you find value in the
book and the ByStar project,
purchasing a copy will help support my work.
Thanks in advance for your support.
And here are the same links
as a native Reveal slide.
If instead of a video, you are viewing this
presentation as a Reveal web page,
you can just click on the pointers and URLs.
The concept of polyexistentials has not appeared
in prior discussions of validity of IPR.
Once you start thinking in terms of monoexistence
and polyexistence, the recognition of
illegitimacy of Western IPR becomes very simple.
I want to very quickly give you a taste of that.
You can of course dig deeper in the book.
Existence and possession are aspects of nature.
Ownership are man-made rules.
All material objects exist in singular
and are monoexistentials.
For monoexistentials, things are simple.
Monoexsitentials, say paper,
exists in singular.
It naturally has a single possessor.
A single owner can be assigned to it
which then makes that single possession lawful.
Polyexistentials naturally exist in multiples.
Much of our world is actually a mixture of
monoexistentials and polyexistentials,
which we call mixed-existentials.
Possession of polyexistentials is naturally
many-to-many. Without any conflict,
polyexistentials can have many possessors.
Polyexistentials are inherently Non-Rivalry.
The requirement for ownership to be in harmony
with the nature of possession and existence is
violated by the Western IPR regime which assigns
a single owner to what exists
and is possessed in multiples.
The end result is
creation of Artificial Scarcity.
Ramification of ownership mistakes
are usually catastrophic.
Consider the previous Western and American
ownership mistake -- that of American Slavery --
ownership of Africans by Americans and Europeans.
See Chapter 7 -
"Western Slavery and the Western IPR Regime"
of the book for some parallels
between these mistakes.
This time with the Western IPR ownership mistake
all of humanity is in danger.
So, how are we to
correct this catastrophic mistake?
The strategies of Public Licenses and
FOSS are not sufficient.
hese are minor band-aids.
We need to do a lot more.
We need to understand what are we going to
replace the mistaken Western IPR regime with.
My answer is:
"Libre-Halaal Governance of Polyexistentials".
Much of my book revolves around that.
We need to fully reject ownership of
polyexistentals and replace it with attribution
machinaries towards just rewards.
We need to abolish the "Artificial Scarcity" of
polyexistentials that the Western IPR regime
has created and restore
polyexistentals back to their natural state,
that of "Non-Rivalrous Public Goods".
By now many Westerners and many West-Toxicated
are thinking: these are empty slogans that are
going no where.
And they are right.
Copyright and Patents are
fully entrenched in the West.
But what about the rest of the world,
what about the
Chinese, the Iranians, Brazilians, Cubans
and the rest.
The Intellectual Property Rights
regime is not universal.
There is more to the World than the West.
What if the WTO was to be recognized
for what it is:
the Western Trade Organization?
Thus far, I have been discussing the nature of
all polyexistentials -- any formula in any form.
Next, I want to turn our attention to
digitals in general and Software in particular.
Software is a
very special form of polyexistentials.
Software is immediately useful.
Software produces tools.
Digitals as text, music, video, etc.
are pure forms of polyexistentials
that are controlled by software.
As developers we know well that we can best
produce good software through collaboration.
In that collaborative model,
the software itself performs a collaborative role.
Software functions as a vessel for accumulation
of our expert component contributions.
The Western IPR model cultivates
"Artificial Scarcities" and "competition",
but software developers instinctly
recognized the superiority of
the natural collaborative model.
Through Public Licenses, us software developers,
have done a jujitsu on the IPR model and have
created a collaborative framework inside of the
copyright model. Based on that,
Natural Public Goods
have defeated Artificial Scarcity.
Our success with software is proof that the
entirety of the Western IPR regime is flawed.
As a profession, us Software Engineers, need to
create a relationship with society.
We need to demand for societal rules
which establish proper manner-of-existence
of software and internet application services.
In return, based on that,
we should fulfill our guardianship role and make
sure that autonomy and privacy are preserved and
that practiced digital ecosystems are healthy.
To get there we need to come up with the right
label that represents the proper
manner-of-existence of software.
Thus far, two labels
have appeared on the scene:
Free Software and Open Source.
I am saying that both are problematic.
Free Software is ill directed.
It is based on the model of granting users,
freedoms that are irrelevant to most software users.
Perhaps Copyleft or Ethical Software
could have been better labels.
Open Source is a moral compromise.
It rejects the requirement for perpetuity of Copyleft.
It facilitates convergence of corporate interest
and surrogate activities of software developers.
Over time, proprietary corporations too
have come to recognize the
superiority of the collaborative model.
These proprietary corporations then derailed
the original intent that all software
should always remain open-source.
With permissive public licenses which
permit open-source becoming proprietary,
the intent of Free Software has been
marginalized and permissive open-source
has become the norm.
I expand on all of this in Chapter 12,
"Digital Non-Proprietary Movements".
Instead of Free Software and Open Source,
the label that I introduce is: "Libre-Halaal".
The Libre-Halaal label is distinct and
different from FOSS labels.
As an inside-of-IPR strategy,
the Libre-Halaal label maps
to a single public license ---
the Affero GPL (AGPL).
In the Libre-Halaal model,
it is not up to developers to
choose their own licenses.
There is only one correct license that conveys the
Libre-Halaal manner-of-existence of software.
Also, unlike the FOSS labels that dance around
the validity of the Western IPR regime,
the Libre-Halaal label recognizes
the invalidity of the Western IPR regime,
calls for abolishment of Western IPR
and suggests various outside-of-IPR strategies.
See Part V, "Formulation of Societal Policies"
for details.
Furthermore, unlike FOSS which is
just software oriented, the Libre-Halaal label goes
beyond software and also
applies to internet application services.
In many ways, software is yesterday's news.
Much of what we are experiencing
today is in the form of
internet application services.
Internet application services provide
remote access to execution of software.
As such, much of FOSS has become proprietary
internet application services
as AGPL is rarely used.
This is why the Libre-Halaal definitions and labels
span software and Internet Application Services.
Based on the interdisciplinary stage setting that
the "Nature of Polyexistentials" book provided
and the ByStar blueprint that we reviewed, we can
now focus on Blee.
Think of Blee as a layer on top of Emacs and
think of BISOS as a layer on top of Debian.
Let's bootstrap Raw-BISOS and Raw-Blee.
Starting from scratch,
get yourself a fresh copy of Debian 12.
Then go to https://github.com/bxGenesis/start
The README.org file of that github repo is same
as Chapter 18,
"Engineering Adoption of BISOS and ByStar"
of the book.
We will next run "raw-bisos.sh", but prior to
that let's take a quick look.
This bootstrap scripts will
do a lot as root on your Fresh-Debian.
It is best to first try it on a disposable VM.
raw-bisos.sh adds
the current debian user to sudoers.
Then it installs pipx.
And then with pipx
it installs from PyPI bisos.provision.
bisos.provision includes additional
bash scripts that are then executed.
Full installation involves setting up various
accounts, groups, various directory hierarchies,
lots of apt packages and lots of python packages
from the bisos namespace.
If you are ready, copy and paste this line and
run it.
You will be prompted for the root password.
Then be patient.
Full installation can take 15 minutes or so.
The logs of this script are also captured in
~/raw-bisos-${dateTag}-log.org
What has been installed on your system are
Raw-BISOS and Raw-Blee.
The universality of Debian let's us build on
BISOS and Blee both in the usage environment and
the service environment.
With Emacs 30 now available on Android and with
Termux apt packages infrastructure in place, it
will be very viable to
port BISOS and Blee to Android.
We have not done so yet.
We are waiting for Emacs-30 to mature up.
This is ByStar's "Mobile Second" strategy.
Upon completion of the bootstrapping process, you
end up with Raw-BISOS and Raw-Blee.
You then need to relogin.
At which point you notice that a new account
called bystar has been created.
"bystar" is the default usage account.
Let's login into it.
You will see a customized ByStar Gnome Desktop.
You will also notice a "Blee Startup" icon.
Let's use it and start Blee.
Notice that the Emacs splash-screen has been
replaced and also note that the splash-screen is
in org-mode.
All the original Emacs splash-screen
info is kept under "About Emacs".
Let me enlarge the screen.
Now we can live inside of Blee.
Notice that the top
drop down Emacs menus have been augmented.
Everything to the left of the "File" menu, is new.
Notice the "Panels" menus.
More on these later.
Now let me get myself a shell.
And run tail /etc/passwd.
Notice that a number of
new accounts have been created.
Notably: bisos, bystar and bpos-delimiter.
Let's next cd to /bisos.
Everything related to bisos is in here.
The rest is as Debian was.
Let's take a look at /bisos/blee/env3.
All the elisp code for Blee is in here.
For now, Blee is layered on top of Doom.
Raw-BISOS and Raw-Blee are starting points.
They are meant to be customized.
Let's next see how that is done.
Raw-BISOS and Raw-Blee are foundational layers.
They can be augmented in a variety of ways.
The basic unit in the ByStar model is the
"Autonomous Site".
Think of the "Autonomous Site" as the
totality of computing and communication
capabilities in a modern family
home plus the ability of that family to host
their own internet application services.
Let's walk through how Raw-BISOS and Raw-Blee are
used to construct an Autonomous Site.
BISOS augmentation model is based on
"BISOS Capability Bundles" BCBs.
Raw-BISOS can be augmented to
become a Virtual Machines Hosting service.
From there on we can use reproducible images to
implement the infrastructure of sites.
Two key site services are the
"Site BPOs Gitlab Server"
and "Site Registrars".
With these in place we can facilitate
self-hosting, which in the BISOS model is called
Possession Assertable Libre Services (PALS).
These topics and these concepts are described in
Chapter 17, "Technology of ByStar: BISOS".
The concepts of Service Portability, Service
Possession Assertion, Autonomous Site and Inner,
Outer and Exposed Rims of Autonomous Site are
fundamental to ByStar.
These are shown in this figure as
"Network Abodes".
Chapter 17 of the book provides more details.
Blee introduces a number of new concepts that
augment Emacs. Some of these are intertwined with
BISOS and ByStar. But some are not.
Here, I provide some examples of these new
general concepts.
We love Emacs and we love Unix because their
design is convivial. By convivial, I am referring
to Ivan Illich's concept and terminology of
"Tools for Conviviality". It was first
published in 1973. It's a must read.
A goal of the design of the ByStar Digital
Ecosystem is to enlarge aggregated conviviality.
Here, let's start by reviewing the idioms and
means that have made Emacs and Unix so very
convivial and some of the key idioms that have
augmented them over the years -- I am showing
them as "Linux PlusPlus"
and "Emacs PlusPlus".
For the most part these
two philosophies have not been combined.
They were developed and have
evolved mostly separately.
Think of BISOS idioms as an extension of Linux
PlusPlus idioms and think of Blee idioms as an
extension of Emacs PlusPlus.
Then intertwine BISOS and Blee.
This aggregated convivial tools powers ByStar.
Let me first explain what I mean by aggregated
convivial tools, and then
let me give some examples.
Here is a key sentence from Illich's,
"Tools for Conviviality" 1973 essay:
Convivial tools are those which give each person
who uses them the greatest opportunity to enrich
the environment with the
fruits of his or her vision.
Proprietary manner-of-existence of software
makes them industrial.
Libre-Halaal manner-of-existence
of software is a prerequisite for conviviality.
The concept of
"Org Dynamic Blocks" is very powerful.
But, why should they be primarily used
in Org-Mode.
I say let's generalize them to
"Emacs Dynamic Blocks".
Have defaults for org-dblock-start-re in
every relevant mode and use them everywhere.
Blee does that.
In programming languages, Dynamic
Blocks can be used as visible macros.
Let me give you an example of how I use them.
For those of us who live inside of Emacs,
enhancing programming with org-mode capabilities
is awesome.
Incredibly awesome!
This can be done in two ways.
(1) With Literate Programming and org-babel.
and (2) with
Traditional/Surrounded Programming and COMEEGA.
COMEEGA stands for
Collaborative Org-Mode Enhanced Emacs
Generalized Authorship.
It is just an acronym that I have come up with.
Literate Programming and org-babel
are well established.
There is a related talk in EmacsConf-2024 titled:
"Literate Programming for the 21st Century".
COMEEGA is the inverse of org-babel.
I prefer COMEEGA over org-babel,
because I prefer
Traditional/Surrounded Programming
over Literate Programming.
To each his own.
This is not about that debate.
This is about mixing your
programming-mode with org-mode.
Much of Blee and BISOS
are implemented in COMEEGA.
Almost all of our Elisp, Python, Bash
and LaTeX work uses COMEEGA.
Full and proper use of COMEEGA,
requires Polymode. Let's call that Poly-COMEEGA.
But Emacs's Polymode is work-in-progress,
particularly now with the new tree-sitter.
So, in the interim, my usage of
COMEEGA has been in the form of Toggle-COMEEGA.
Where I manually switch between the
programming-mode and org-mode.
For me this has
proved to be a fine interim solution.
In Emacs, the way that we have been
dealing with documentation and
information retrieval is archaic.
Man-pages, TeXInfo, Helpful-Mode and
convention based Doc-Strings are old and
limited.
In BISOS and Blee, we use Blee-Panels for all
kinds of documentation.
Let me show you some examples.
Two fundamental autonomy oriented capabilities
that ByStar offers to individuals are:
Email and Content Generation and Publication.
I'll give a quick overview of
these two important capabilities.
At the EmacsConf-2022, the title of my
presentation was:
"Revisiting the anatomy of Emacs mail user agents".
In that presentation I
gave a brief overview of BISOS-MARMEE
(Multi-Account Resident Mail Exchange Environment)
and Blee-Gnus.
In ByStar, these are typically paired with
byname.net autonomous email services.
Content Production and Self-Publication is a
foundational Blee and BISOS Capability Bundle.
Both this presentation and
the Nature of Polyexistentials book
were developed with Blee LCNT.
The original text is always in COMEEGA-LaTeX --
LaTeX augmented by Org-Mode.
This is the inverse
direction of exporting LaTeX from Org-Mode.
For typesetting,
the LaTeX syntax is far more
powerful than org-mode.
And with COMEEGA-LaTeX,
you can also benefit from
all that org-mode offers.
For presentation/screen-casting,
the original text is then augmented in layers
by images, audio voice-overs, screen captures,
videos and captions.
The Beamer LaTeX file is then processed
by both LaTeX and HeVeA.
LaTeX produced slides are then
absorbed in html by HeVeA as images.
HeVeA is a LaTeX to html translator.
HeVeA output is destined to be dispensed by Reveal.js.
This video is just a screen capture of the autoplay of
reveal file.
Viewing this presentation in its
original Reveal form is a richer experience.
All of this involves a whole lot of integration
scripting. In Raw-BISOS these scripts are in
file:/bisos/core/lcnt/bin
To say that ByStar, BISOS and Blee are big and
ambitious is an understatement.
And clearly, a small team won't be able to
deliver the outlandish blueprint that is outlined
in the Nature of Polyexistentials book.
We have been at this for over two decades and we
feel that now in 2024,
it makes sense to involve you.
The pointers and instructions for installation
and usage of BISOS and Blee that I have provided,
produce systems that are minimally functional,
but are not clean.
At this time don't expect software and services
stability and support.
Throughout this presentation, I have been
emphasizing Service Portability and Possession
Assertable Libre Services (PALS).
But, a complete digital ecosystem includes various other types of
internet application services as well.
In this slide PALS are the center and are then
augmented by different other type of services.
In the ByStar model, equivalent of Facebook style
application services are called:
"Inter-Autonomous Interactions".
With individual oriented PALS in place, using
OAuth of PALS, resources can be shared.
Based on that we can then structure Inter-Autonomous
Interactions while preserving much privacy.
Any blueprint for a digital ecosystem must also
consider the economic and business dimensions.
Chapter 13, "Polyexistential Capitalism",
delves into proper economic models for
polyexsitentials.
The concept of Attribution
Based Economics (ABE) which has been discussed in
this forum before is included.
Chapter 21,
"Private Sector Strategies:
ByStar Open Business Plan"
deals with the business dimension of ByStar.
What if in addition to being ethics oriented,
the entirety of this book could also be
considered a sophisticated business plan?
Are there any Venture Capitalists that use Emacs?
Here is a set of relatively complete domains and
links for digging deeper. These pointers are
structured in 4 layers. Ideology, Software,
Services and Guardianship.
If Blee, BISOS, ByStar, Libre-Halaal and
Polyexistentials have piqued your interest and if
you wish to participate in making these ideas
more widespread and want to further cultivate
them, here are some suggestions.
The examples of the Blee concepts that I chose
were purposeful and targeted.
I am hopeful that org-mode developers and emacs
developers would recognize that it makes good
sense to expand the scope of org dynamic blocks
to the entirety of emacs.
I am hopeful that the concept of polymode -- a
single buffer with regions in different modes and
org-mode in particular -- would receive a high
priority in our tree-sitter transition. I am
hopeful that Blee-COMEEGA can become a
generalized form of polymode.
I am hopeful that we can build on Blee-Panels and
move towards having a richer base for a universal
Emacs documentation framework.
If participation in any of these is of interest
to you, please feel welcome to contact me.
Emacs Conferences have proven to be
very useful and productive.
I look forward to your thoughts, feedback and questions.
I want to thank all the EmacsConf Organizers for
their great work.
And Sacha, Leo and Amin in particular.