Re: Handling BUGS.

[Rob Browning]

Thien-Thi Nguyen <address@hidden> writes:

> how about promote devel/ out of guile-core/ entirely?  it is generally
> not related to any specific branch.  bugs housekeeping is part of the
> development effort, after all...

Hmm.  I think I can see the motivation, but I can also see the value
in having a "complete tree" so that people who grab CVS and want to
hack have all that info on hand.  Not sure.  Would we still ship
updated versions of these files at release time (as I've suggested for
BUGS), or omit them entirely?

> might as well specify a known format, how about rfc822?  it's time to
> see how well the elisp translation machinery holds up to rfc822.el
> (moderately hairy load IMHO).  if not, someone will check in rfc822.scm
> soon i'm sure.

Very sneaky :> I like it...

On a semi-related note, and FWIW, eventually I'd like to be able to
manipulate the bug system via email (gpg signed perhaps), and perhaps
also via the web.  But for now, I think we'd be fine with just some
slight improvements.

-- 
Rob Browning
rlb @defaultvalue.org, @linuxdevel.com, and @debian.org
Previously @cs.utexas.edu
GPG=1C58 8B2C FB5E 3F64 EA5C  64AE 78FE E5FE F0CB A0AD