I do think there is widespread agreement that we should make public and promote multiple editions. Finding a mechanism for this that does not burden anyone too much is still a problem, though.
Most of the disagreement is about whether we should – or how much we should – deemphasize the empty edition. But it does seem like a very good idea to publicly support other editions.
Right. I’d, myself, rephrase that as : “promote editions that are the most relevant to individual user needs”.
I think phrasing it that way makes clearer the necessity to explicity point to suited editions for purposes.
To echo what has already been said I agree having standard editions is a great idea. I see a certain amount of parallel between emacs and TiddlyWiki. Both can be used out of the box without much customization or you can install preconfigured editions such as Doom emacs. You can use emacs straight out of the box and never write a single line of emacs lisp or install a single package. The same is true of TiddlyWiki.
I also feel this reoccurring topic is always going to be biased by people who choose to read this forum and reply on a regular basis. The idea for creating editions is a good one. It’s just not something that the core maintainers and community members are attracted to.