From xemacs-m  Tue Mar 25 00:30:02 1997
Received: from crystal.WonderWorks.COM (crystal.WonderWorks.com [192.203.206.1])
	by xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id AAA10964
	for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Tue, 25 Mar 1997 00:30:01 -0600 (CST)
Received: by crystal.WonderWorks.COM 
	id QQciiy00452; Tue, 25 Mar 1997 01:08:03 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1997 01:08:03 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <QQciiy00452.199703250608@crystal.WonderWorks.COM>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Kyle Jones <kyle_jones@wonderworks.com>
To: xemacs-beta@xemacs.org
Subject: Re: XE19.15-B104: 'xemacs -batch' misdemeanor
In-Reply-To: <m2bu88a6hm.fsf@altair.xemacs.org>
References: <9703241553.AA03158@ndsoft.com>
	<m2bu88a6hm.fsf@altair.xemacs.org>
X-Mailer: VM 6.23 under 19.15 XEmacs Lucid (beta103)
X-Face: /cA45WHG7jWq>(O3&Z57Y<"WsX5ddc,4c#w0F*zrV#=M
        0@~@,s;b,aMtR5Sqs"+nU.z^CSFQ9t`z2>W,S,]:[+2^
        Nbf6v4g>!&,7R4Ot4Wg{&tm=WX7P["9%a)_da48-^tGy
        ,qz]Z,Zz\{E.,]'EO+F)@$KtF&V

Steven L Baur writes:
 > Unless someone argues convincingly against it, I'm going to fix 20.1
 > so that -batch  does imply `-q -no-site-file'.

Continued functioning of code that expects the old behavior.
Why should batch processing imply no local initialization,
particularly when we have flags to disable this initialization?
Why should the burden to convince be on those who just want to
things to keep working?

