From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs on OS X development Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 06:25:36 +0300 Message-ID: <837gtmgcb3.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87r4s68rr4.fsf@lifelogs.com> <83A41E83-79C8-4490-966B-CD224041E840@gmail.com> <6BC9F752-C724-4C3D-B2B9-088597A57C3E@gmail.com> <878ve943r8.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87obn3zyw2.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87394aqjx3.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87d33ektbo.fsf@wanadoo.es> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1343618767 8947 80.91.229.3 (30 Jul 2012 03:26:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 03:26:07 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=D3scar?= Fuentes Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jul 30 05:26:07 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1SvgcR-0000ev-Bm for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 05:26:07 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38403 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SvgcQ-00011O-IU for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 29 Jul 2012 23:26:06 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:46349) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SvgcO-000113-22 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 29 Jul 2012 23:26:04 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SvgcM-0000sJ-UC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 29 Jul 2012 23:26:03 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout20.012.net.il ([80.179.55.166]:38570) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SvgcM-0000rv-M6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 29 Jul 2012 23:26:02 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout20.012.net.il by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0M7Y00H00ES0D600@a-mtaout20.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 06:25:23 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0M7Y00GAFEUBV7B0@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 06:25:23 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: <87d33ektbo.fsf@wanadoo.es> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-Received-From: 80.179.55.166 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:151970 Archived-At: > From: =D3scar Fuentes > Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 02:04:27 +0200 >=20 > I'll suggest to use different branches for every port (including MS > Windows). IMNSHO, this is a bad idea. Its only sure consequence will be divergence and bitrot of code, at least for MS Windows, because none of the people who care about that port have time to invest on merges. (FWIW, I don't see anything different on the NS side, but maybe I'm mistaken.) Given our style of committing changes to the master repository, which involves almost no discussions, let alone formal peer review before the commit, which would involve explaining the rationale for the changes needed to consider whether to merge or not, and given the sheer rate of commits, this divergence will be fast and cruel. > This way you can avoid most part of the #ifdef crazyness, keeping > the code much cleaner and responsability divisions better defined. >=20 > A consequence of this would be to have to distribute several source > tarballs (one per port) instead of just a monolithic one, but I thi= nk it > is a lesser price to pay. The real price to pay will be the bugs we miss on each separate platform, which are only revealed on the other, due to a different compiler/library/environment/memory arrangement/whatever. How many times in the past bugs in the Emacs code were found on Windows (or even in the MS-DOS port)? Segregate the ports, and you will lose all that. In effect, the project will be split into several ones that hardly ever communicate. At some time in the past, developers understood very well the value o= f the diversity for the quality of their packages. I lament that time.