Re: your vc-hg.el change

["Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@xemacs.org>]

mail@justinbogner.com writes:
 > "Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@xemacs.org> writes:
 > > For bzr, it is mildly important *not* to change the status quo.  Emacs
 > > developers especially will be hurt if bzr doesn't allow pointing to a
 > > user-installed bzr, as every recent bzr release has improved
 > > performance.
 > >
 > 
 > Wouldn't the user's PATH point to the bzr they like?

The bzr I like depends on which project I am working on at the
moment.  Ditto the darcs.  That's one reason why I like git best of
all. ;-)

Specifically, since Emacs has not yet implemented bzr, I really don't
give two shakes of a lamb's tail whether I trash my Emacs repo, or
even whether I can access it on any given day.  In the event I write a
patch I'll be doing it against CVS.  So I can update my bzr for Emacs
nightly.  I don't plan to do that for my Mailman repos as they
occasionally contain code that may not exist anywhere else; I stick to
whatever Gentoo considers stable.

 > I find it unlikely that they would be able to reasonably use it
 > otherwise...

It's a bit fragile, but making that variable buffer-local DTRTs.  YMMV.