From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Trunk still not open Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 00:16:32 +0900 Message-ID: <87ob18lsj3.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> References: <6xwqfxhl88.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <83txb1mcsy.fsf@gnu.org> <87siqlku0i.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87r4659kau.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1394810307 12630 80.91.229.3 (14 Mar 2014 15:18:27 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2014 15:18:27 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Bastien Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Mar 14 16:18:35 2014 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 1WOTsT-0003yc-2b for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 16:18:29 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:45278 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WOTsS-0005II-Cm for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 11:18:28 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58011) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WOTqq-0000mS-3l for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 11:16:53 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WOTqk-0004qI-4I for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 11:16:48 -0400 Original-Received: from mgmt2.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp ([130.158.97.224]:53888) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WOTqd-0004oD-CM; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 11:16:35 -0400 Original-Received: from uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp [130.158.99.156]) by mgmt2.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id E65FD970863; Sat, 15 Mar 2014 00:16:32 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000) id D6B0A1A28DC; Sat, 15 Mar 2014 00:16:32 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: <87r4659kau.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> X-Mailer: VM undefined under 21.5 (beta34) "kale" 2a0f42961ed4 XEmacs Lucid (x86_64-unknown-linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 130.158.97.224 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:170363 Archived-At: Bastien writes: > "Stephen J. Turnbull" writes: > > Of course there's no reason to require that *patch authors* write > > docs, 3rd parties can do that just as well. > Yes, but blocking code patches while waiting that someone else > write the related doc patches seems very impracticable. Take a look around. Lots of projects practice it with good results. If you mean some patches will never get applied, sure. YMMV, but I'll take the docs in the few cases where authors choose departure. (Actually I won't, since that would be infringement -- FDL is incompatible with all licenses used for XEmacs content -- but that's what I think Emacs should do.)