From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jason Rumney Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel,gmane.emacs.multi-tty Subject: Re: Merging multitty Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 11:25:51 +0100 Message-ID: <464444AF.9070905@gnu.org> References: <2wmz0iriyj.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87fy65k6eh.fsf@red-bean.com> <853b25lk43.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <86bqgr3g1h.fsf_-_@lola.quinscape.zz> <4644355E.7070004@gnu.org> <867irf3cjo.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1178880324 5176 80.91.229.12 (11 May 2007 10:45:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 10:45:24 +0000 (UTC) Cc: multi-tty@fnord.hu, emacs-devel@gnu.org, karoly@lorentey.hu, rms@gnu.org, Kenichi Handa To: David Kastrup Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri May 11 12:45:22 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HmScj-0004UK-54 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 11 May 2007 12:45:21 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HmSk8-0002qJ-BX for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 11 May 2007 06:53:00 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HmSj9-0001No-2O for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 11 May 2007 06:51:59 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HmSj8-0001Mf-0s for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 11 May 2007 06:51:58 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HmSj7-0001MK-Pm for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 11 May 2007 06:51:57 -0400 Original-Received: from outmail1.freedom2surf.net ([194.106.33.237]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1HmSbe-0008VA-US; Fri, 11 May 2007 06:44:15 -0400 Original-Received: from [127.0.0.1] (i-83-67-23-108.freedom2surf.net [83.67.23.108]) by outmail1.freedom2surf.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4900D50654; Fri, 11 May 2007 11:26:01 +0100 (BST) User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (Windows/20070326) In-Reply-To: <867irf3cjo.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.4-2.6 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:70798 gmane.emacs.multi-tty:679 Archived-At: David Kastrup wrote: > I think we more or less agreed (modulo my possibly biased > recollections) that Emacs 23 should have the multitty functionality. > =20 I am not arguing against including it in Emacs 23, I just think it is a=20 mistake to check code that is knowingly broken on some platforms into=20 the trunk. I will put effort into getting it working again on Windows (assuming=20 noone else beats me to it), whether it is on a CVS branch or the trunk,=20 as I have done with emacs-unicode-2, but due to the time I have=20 available this could take a couple of months or more. I don't think it=20 is acceptable to have the trunk broken for that long, as it will prevent=20 some other developers who use Windows from helping with Emacs 23=20 development, if they do not have the w32 api experience to help with=20 fixing the multitty breakage, for example they may want to help with=20 some Lisp package. I am not asking that it be flawless before merging, just that it isn't=20 horribly broken. > I have my doubts that if we merge unicode-2 first and postpone > multitty until all issues with it are resolved, the issues will never > actually get resolved. In particular when multitty is not kept > synched to the trunk after a unicode-2 merge. > =20 Why would you not sync multitty to the trunk after the unicode-2 merge?=20 Surely Karoly, Handa and anyone else willing and interested should start=20 on resolving the merge problems as soon as possible. Even if we did the=20 multitty merge first, we would have the same problems on the unicode-2=20 branch, and would require the same people working on resolving them. > I don't think that this is likely to happen in K=E1roly's private > repository, I really think that we need to merge it into the trunk for > a reasonable chance to have this happen. > =20 I agree that it won't happen in Karoly's private repository. I have=20 tried using it, but the revision control system he uses seems to be=20 unstable (from a user interface perspective), and the instructions he=20 gives for checking out no longer work. Reading the the latest quickstart=20 guide for bazaar did not really help. But committing it to a branch ASAP=20 would let the work commence on stabilizing it on other platforms ready=20 for merging into trunk. >> Your point that Karoly is not going to be available for much longer >> is a point against merging into trunk quickly IMHO. Either someone >> else will step forward to maintain that code, in which case it >> doesn't matter if the merge to trunk happens later, or noone wants >> to maintain the multitty code, in which case merging into trunk >> would be a mistake. >> =20 > > I disagree with that assessment. It presumes that not making Emacs > multitty-capable ever is a reasonable option. It is the only option if we don't have anyone willing to maintain that=20 capability. But judging from your activism on this, I don't expect we=20 will have that problem.