From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Why are so many great packages not trying to get included in GNU Emacs? WAS: Re: Making Emacs more friendly to newcomers Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2020 15:50:05 +0300 Message-ID: <837dwb3zb6.fsf@gnu.org> References: <863691n4xl.wl-me@enzu.ru> <87imhw431x.fsf@yahoo.com> <87mu78huhx.fsf_-_@yahoo.com> <87k12bdgx7.fsf@yahoo.com> <87r1wi7a8o.fsf@yahoo.com> <875zdteybt.fsf@runbox.com> <87368wrvf5.fsf@yahoo.com> <86k126d83n.wl-me@enzu.ru> <83pnbyckvv.fsf@gnu.org> <4923d7e98f5ed816a7569093dbc673153adcea88.camel@yandex.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="46274"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: stefan@marxist.se, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Konstantin Kharlamov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Jun 13 14:51:00 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jk5ci-000Bx4-8C for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 13 Jun 2020 14:51:00 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39058 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jk5ch-0007ud-9c for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 13 Jun 2020 08:50:59 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:41472) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jk5c1-0007Pu-Fa for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 13 Jun 2020 08:50:17 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:56359) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jk5c0-0002Cz-OC; Sat, 13 Jun 2020 08:50:16 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=2983 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1jk5c0-0000lf-03; Sat, 13 Jun 2020 08:50:16 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4923d7e98f5ed816a7569093dbc673153adcea88.camel@yandex.ru> (message from Konstantin Kharlamov on Sat, 13 Jun 2020 14:59:21 +0300) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:252162 Archived-At: > From: Konstantin Kharlamov > Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2020 14:59:21 +0300 > > Okay, so usually email-based projects recommend using git-send- > email. Recently I sent a patch like this¹ and got a complaint it > doesn't look like what git-format-patch would produce (is that maybe a > hint maintainers are being strained too?). Huh, wrong way again? FTR: that wasn't a complaint, it was a gentle request for the future. Your patch was committed, before I sent that request, even though committing it required some extra manual work on my part. We recommend using git-format-patch because it makes applying the patch easier and less error prone. It never occurred to me that a routine recommendation would be interpreted as a "complaint", let alone trigger a 950-word rant.