[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: On the subject of Git, Bazaar, and the future of Emacs development
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: On the subject of Git, Bazaar, and the future of Emacs development |
Date: |
Mon, 01 Apr 2013 08:54:49 +0300 |
> From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <address@hidden>
> Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2013 09:50:29 +0900
> Cc: Xue Fuqiao <address@hidden>, Michael Welsh Duggan <address@hidden>,
> Leo Liu <address@hidden>, address@hidden
>
> Emacs developers as a group are pretty sensitive to improvements in
> the VCS, and therefore it would be "nice" if they could have the
> leading VCS most of the time.
>
> It is my opinion that the architecture of git (including the plethora
> of plumbing commands that people seem to love to hate) makes it the
> odds-on favorite for the role of "leading VCS", more than Mercurial.
Then why did XEmacs choose Mercurial, and did not switch even now?
- Re: On the subject of Git, Bazaar, and the future of Emacs development,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- Re: On the subject of Git, Bazaar, and the future of Emacs development, Xue Fuqiao, 2013/04/01
- Re: On the subject of Git, Bazaar, and the future of Emacs development, John Wiegley, 2013/04/01
- Re: On the subject of Git, Bazaar, and the future of Emacs development, Eli Zaretskii, 2013/04/02
- Re: On the subject of Git, Bazaar, and the future of Emacs development, John Wiegley, 2013/04/04
- Re: On the subject of Git, Bazaar, and the future of Emacs development, Eli Zaretskii, 2013/04/04
- Re: On the subject of Git, Bazaar, and the future of Emacs development, joakim, 2013/04/04
- Re: On the subject of Git, Bazaar, and the future of Emacs development, John Wiegley, 2013/04/04