[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Using Git to manage your Emacs changes

From: Jason Earl
Subject: Re: Using Git to manage your Emacs changes
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 2010 15:54:15 -0600
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux)

Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:

>> From: Jason Earl <address@hidden>
>> Cc: address@hidden,  address@hidden,  address@hidden,  address@hidden,  
>> address@hidden,  address@hidden,  address@hidden,  address@hidden,  
>> address@hidden,  address@hidden
>> Date: Sat, 24 Apr 2010 13:33:49 -0600
>> Bazaar has this marked as a bug (wishlist), but they are essentially
>> waiting for someone to come up with a way to make texinfo documentation
>> from their existing rst documentation.  In fact, it could easily be
>> argued that they are moving farther away from texinfo as they have moved
>> from simply requiring docutils to requiring the more complicated sphinx
>> documentation build system.
> If Bazaar developers want help in automatic conversion of their docs
> system to Texinfo, they should talk to Texinfo maintainers.  With the
> upcoming switch from makeinfo written in C to texi2html written in
> Perl, it may be easier to add additional translators; at least that
> was the theory and the justification for the switch.

I am glad to hear this.  I like Texinfo.

>> My question, and I ask this as a person whose one small contribution
>> to GNU is that I helped (a bit) with the conversion of the Emacs repo
>> from CVS to bzr, is why pretend that Bazaar is part of the GNU
>> project when the GNU developers (and systems administrators) seem to
>> overwhelmingly prefer git?  Worse, they are actively trying to
>> undermine Bazaar, including long discussions on how to circumvent
>> Bazaar on this very list.
>> Dump bzr and make git part of the GNU "system," if that is what it
>> takes, but do not pretend that Bazaar is part of the GNU project when
>> clearly it is not.
> Please do not exaggerate, and please do not generalize too much from
> what you've heard here.  There are definitely several people who were
> discussing git, but I would not recommend concluding that they
> represent the ``overwhelming'' part of Emacs developers.  They
> certainly do not represent me.  I'm using Bazaar, and I do not intend
> to switch to git any time soon.

That's good to hear.

>> Bazaar has received nothing but bad publicity from the switch, and
>> the Emacs development group appears to have been hampered more than
>> helped
> I think both of these assertions are false.  I definitely feel that
> Bazaar helps me more than CVS did.  I do hope that Savannah will
> switch to the smart server some time this century, and I definitely
> would love to see Bazaar need less bandwidth than it asks for now.
> Then the quality of my life as an Emacs developer will be better yet.
> But it has definitely improved already, since we switched.  So I would
> like to thank you and others who've helped make that happen.

I apologize for over-reacting.  Like I said before, apparently I am too
close to the issue.  I will keep similar opinions to myself in the


reply via email to

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