Eli Zaretskii writes: > Such significant changes in our processes cannot be done by > "deciding". It's a large job that needs motivated individuals to do > it. Doing it also requires first-hand knowledge of our maintenance > procedures and special needs. I agree. Whatever tooling gets added, it should not get in the way of how the maintainers work now. They are still doing the hard work and need to have a workflow that works best for them. > So if someone wants to make this happen, I urge you to come on board, > get involved in maintenance, collect some real-life experience in > routine development and maintenance tasks, and then lead the change, > doing most of the work yourself. And yes, Savannah will most probably > be a large part of the equation, so you will need their cooperation as > well. TBH, I've tried this. For years I've been following the mailing list, and I want to get involved in Emacs development. But I've found it hard to get around in the codebase. I'm not sure, but it might be a chicken-and-egg problem. If the tools are not convenient *for me* to follow-up bugs, review patches, etc., it will also not help me familiarize with the codebase and vice-versa. Although that might be an exaggeration, cause I haven't been finding a lot of time to be actively involved in Emacs development. But I've been involved in setting up EMBA, cause I believed it might be the first step towards a "more modern" workflow. If the Emacs community, and their maintainers, are open to adding such workflow, I'll do my best to get involved in that too. -- Toon