Re: URGENT - which-key FSF contributor status

[Philip Kaludercic]

Stefan Kangas <stefankangas@gmail.com> writes:

> Justin Burkett <justin@burkett.cc> writes:
>
>> I'd like to echo this question. Up until now, I have managed which-key
>> through a github repo which then gets synced to elpa. I'm now not sure
>> what to do with github and specifically contributions I get through
>> there. I can archive that repo if bugs and contributions should now go
>> through standard emacs channels.

That would certainly be one option, and one of the simpler ones.  You
could also ask for access to emacs.git, if you think you'll be needing it.

> It's basically your decision as the maintainer of which-key.
>
> Org mode, CC mode, and others, have external repositories and merge code
> back and forth.  This would require you to periodically do these merges,
> for example when you release a new version.  This means checking for
> changes in emacs.git and merging them into your tree, and then merging
> the released version into our tree.
>
> Some other packages, for example Gnus and eglot, are now developed fully
> in emacs.git and have abandoned their external repositories.  Bugs for
> those packages are now also always reported on our bug mailing list.
> (We are also okay with preferring bug reports to go elsewhere, but we
> will usually always accept bugs through our regular channels too, and
> then simply forward them to you.)

IIRC Eglot bugs are still sometimes reported on the old bug tracker, but
that is being sunset.

> From the Emacs maintainer point of view, the latter option is always
> going to be the easiest, but again: it's your decision.  So please let
> us know what you prefer.  I'd suggest to document the parts that are
> different from any other package in emacs.git in the "Commentary" of
> which-key.el.
>
> I hope that helps, and please let us know if you have any questions.

-- 
        Philip Kaludercic on peregrine