Re: Elisp branch ready for merge (??)

[Christopher Allan Webber]

Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer writes:

> Christopher Allan Webber <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer writes:
>>
>>> Christopher Allan Webber <address@hidden> writes:
>>>
>>>> Well, I didn't think I'd have time to do this (and in a sense I didn't)
>>>> but:
>>>>   https://gitlab.com/dustyweb/guile/tree/merge-bipt-elisp-wip
>>>>
>>>> I've rebased the whole branch against git master and added ChangeLog
>>>> style entries.  "make check" is passing.  It seems to me that it's ready
>>>> for merge.  I did the best I could on the ChangeLog additions, both with
>>>> my limited ChangeLog experience and from my limited Guile internals
>>>> experience.  So, corrections welcome, but otherwise...
>>>
>>> Exciting!
>>>
>>> Small remark: the "title" line of the commit messages should be complete
>>> sentences.
>>
>> Yes, though I didn't write them.  I also don't know in each case what a
>> complete sentence would be.  I did my best job by filling in the
>> ChangeLog style part.  Often times my figuring out the ChangeLog stuff
>> was based on some sentence fragment.
>>
>> Changing the one part that is the original author's writing to something
>> different... I can do it by attempting to guess, but I'm worried about
>> removing that context.
>>
>> One thing I could do is leave in the description: "Original title: foo"
>>
>> What do you think of that?
>
> In some cases it seems the title is already a sentence, just lacking
> capitalization and punctuation.  (It seems Guile doesn't have a strict
> rule about the punctuation though.)
>
> In other cases it seems like titles that should be "Add foobar" are
> shortened to just "foobar", e.g.:
>
> - guile-backtrace function
> - eval-when
> - fset macro
> - defsubst
> - compiler macros
> - elisp @@ macro
>
> All in all it looks like most titles should be straightforward to fix.
> Fixing any would be better than fixing none IMO.

You are probably right.

> And I'd say mentioning the original title is unnecessary for the
> obvious ones, though we should get Robin's sanctioning for what we do.
> Is Robin perhaps available for some basic feedback?

I haven't heard from them, but if they chose to reach out it would be of
course most welcome!

 - Chris