[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: MH-E 7.4.4 checked in

From: Miles Bader
Subject: Re: MH-E 7.4.4 checked in
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 18:04:10 -0400
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.28i

On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 03:22:42PM +0200, Kim F. Storm wrote:
> > That and 134,295 other bad-for-merging changes....
> Why do we need to merge those changes?
> Don't people get along just fine with using an "unmodified" Oort Gnus
> on CVS emacs ?

Sure (including me).

But there do seem to be `real' changes in the emacs version -- many of them
are fairly trivial (e.g., spelling corrections, or updating Gnus not to use
some obsolete feature), and there are some which appear non-trivial but
which I don't understand.

Many changes are also backported back-and-forth, so gnus already has _some_
of these changes.

If I had a better handle on which changes were really important, it would be
simpler to do as you say (and forward-port only those important changes), but
I don't really, and the sheer quantity of changes makes it hard to spend a
lot of time to analyze each one.

As it is, though, it's looking like no matter what I do, something will end
up broken, so the "give up and drop most of the emacs changes" approach is
looking better and better.  However, I'd still like  to munch on it for a
while (I haven't had much time to spend on this recently) before deciding

BTW, once this is done, I'm going to do my damnedest to keep emacs from
falling so far out of sync with upstream...

Is it true that nothing can be known?  If so how do we know this?  -Woody Allen

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]