emacs-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: what make-dist should include [was Re: Emacs pretest 26.1.91 is out]


From: Stefan Monnier
Subject: Re: what make-dist should include [was Re: Emacs pretest 26.1.91 is out]
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2019 09:42:48 -0500
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux)

>> > With MQ the workflow is pretty simple:
>> >
>> >   1- unpack the tarball
>> >   2- create the repo and commit the unpacked files
>> >   3- pull the patches from their repo
>> >   4- apply the patches ("hg qpush -a")
>> >   5- build
>> 
>> [ The step 0 being "download the tarball".  ]
>> 
>> Hmm... ignoring the issue of Mercurial -vs- Git, the equivalent using
>> the VCS would be:
>> 
>>     0- clone from the remote repository to a local "bare" repository.
>>     1- clone from that local repository
>>     2- do nothing
>>     3- pull the patches from their repo
>>     4- apply the patches
>>     5- build
>
> Yeah, if all I were doing was applying static patches, there would be
> less benefit to using MQ.  But MQ helps with the tedium of managing a
> patch repo as I refine the patches.  (And I'm probably biased, since
> I've been using Mercurial for over 10 years, but I only started using
> Git when Emacs moved to it.)

Note that steps 3-5 are 100% unchanged.

> Sometime a few years ago I used a Mercurial extension to access a Git
> repo.  I had pretty much the same experience: it worked okay but was
> kinda slow.  I don't know if that extension is still available or
> maintained.

If the conversion to a different repository format is the problem, then
I guess passing through tar is not that bad of a deal, indeed (you can
get the same result by "git clone"ing and then committing the result to
an Hg repository, but the benefits are not as clear).


        Stefan



reply via email to

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