From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: martin rudalics Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: master has switched from Automake to GNU Make Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2017 10:28:26 +0100 Message-ID: <58D6383A.1090301@gmx.at> References: <58CB9F6B.5080806@gmx.at> <83h92sz2j9.fsf@gnu.org> <58CBAEB7.5030601@gmx.at> <58CBBC6C.8000104@gmx.at> <58D380FF.1070103@gmx.at> <58D3C84E.5080808@gmx.at> <58D4E0D6.2070101@gmx.at> <86mvcap85t.fsf@stephe-leake.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1490434187 2449 195.159.176.226 (25 Mar 2017 09:29:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2017 09:29:47 +0000 (UTC) To: Stefan Monnier , emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Mar 25 10:29:44 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cri0z-0008RQ-Mx for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 25 Mar 2017 10:29:41 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36483 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cri15-0004Vo-O7 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 25 Mar 2017 05:29:47 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49144) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cri08-0004UV-3D for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Mar 2017 05:28:49 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cri02-0002wz-M2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Mar 2017 05:28:48 -0400 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.18]:57541) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cri02-0002wQ-BN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Mar 2017 05:28:42 -0400 Original-Received: from [192.168.1.100] ([213.162.68.58]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx002 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0Lbuo0-1cQJn12l40-00jErN; Sat, 25 Mar 2017 10:28:31 +0100 In-Reply-To: X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:dfHN6IBbE72+PIEZpH9OJY5T+y2B9d6/eV35GhkBCEAp0C3U/VW BXorBiWDNNiPkbcsc3DAy8DOJT1EbDR1+RHVPinKAD72T3+B2CliJytBlWh0ht2tVBeetSi 0fXcXyI0uid/bzNyWsyqR4vdYQTqgXG8H/GrlEY7tvFfx1cyQO5jjCqtZLgnvdyMP5ftNjd 2e6WPuU2rwCDqhuoo149w== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:yUEs1QTKkHQ=:1xVEEsEZ2ShqFeQGoHRURM ZHkaHp2Cz6RghDIk5XMdtZU3Me9qzknvCgZJJhPtqW7d/mavqF874xyAAt7gCYaBpHNPHX3lT zVifREmpvPV4Z8ZV6DH1NnB1uFW3ka8VL7lzqrBR5y1gmeQU/Kugfcou1uKRvSWaeKr8R4QSV ZE8CZiouHJG8rmqPidDfBAJQdl+x27ms0IpndpTVAD/SMz99gthT1wMFVNprcW7xuoHQOFdVX bzi5udzlvCuKM3nwBDzs8tmVBbBDK3JAkIaGwaEblzgd1qqaIQAEhqKYkQDWpYGL735auV2j+ Xov87rN0O5nXg5MFdG671k4RvPKF59h2wyt//1qQ2y8AVUWpKiEA/94UOgdFqHswwg8UsmDWf cqx8b/DpJVQRZ3xKbASQVQ2djJUrBqwXsuXnN3XaHN2GZWoK8AUkr3q9Jt5ZVV0KS4cMnBN6R dwmQbSdDf6/1BCNPGQFB1jYLktxkuf6UwUM3+TsDpOra2Fvxzpapb+O85mQfzG5uV/X4N5RWl lASct3AMytdv2x5gJjuLRv9RwptQFRF83jnDXhlawfW3FIurOA/6AToZpT1KqEK2r3WHBbCCo 6Ue2zSFT7k1lUwzBIpGJCxce51bRN7MNEsVH+St4nlO7YQB4l3m9HGcione6vtI1CNJg7cRs0 jbuK8GMraiwps3AuZOrBuXQTvL6CuiU5s3CWkovf4pglGaxABjTdBQh4gmXehWk2IxROD/l3W YuGbs8Esyj9ar5K7v1ivbS+JjF9btYb2PKeL5Cg+nk6vjQfxer/sfmHvonFGrI7cP4L7uBL+ X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 212.227.15.18 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:213333 Archived-At: > IMO, when we do a "rebase", Git should also keep the previous history, tho > only as a kind of "weak reference", so you wouldn't see that > "truthful&messy" history unless you cared about it: the rebased > revision wouldn't be enough to recover that messy history, but it would > be enough to relate the new revision with some past "messy" revision you > happened to have lying about. That would be perfect, indeed. martin