Re: On Contributing To Emacs

["Óscar Fuentes" <ofv@wanadoo.es>]

Po Lu <luangruo@yahoo.com> writes:

> Óscar Fuentes <ofv@wanadoo.es> writes:
>
>> Maybe that hints at an usability problem?
>
> No, it probably hints that nobody finds it neccessary to make use of.

Knowing that Emacs is composed by multiple parts largely unrelated one
to another, I think that the people who maintain Org would be happy to
not receive bug reports about Gnus, and so on.

The problem is that either it is not possible or it is too difficult to
set up, AFAIK.

>> Sadly, no. If I submit a bug and get responses to the original report
>> from Alice and Bob, then I answer Alice's message, Bob wont see it
>> unless I add his address to the CC list on my message to Alice.
>
> Okay, but how is that a problem?  Everyone knows to click "Reply All",
> which is present even in webmail, and if someone doesn't, he usually
> remembers after being asked once.

How "Reply All" helps if Bob's address is not on the message I received
from Alice?

>> Well, just to name an example, bugzilla which is both popular and
>> ancient, hardly needs any instructions to do those trivial things.
>
> With Bugzilla, you typically have to read the user guide and several
> pieces of project-specific documentation documenting their conventions
> before you can do something as "trivial" as report a bug.

I have quite a few bugs reported on non-trivial bugzilla instances (gcc,
just to name one) and never had to read any instructions.

>> The mentioned guix debbugs frontend doesn't allow that either.
>
> It does, just not the Guix instance.

You stripped out this important part of my message "it is disabled, the
question is: why?"

>> You can attach cat pics too :-) The hard part is not attaching patches,
>> the hard part is to recognize and handle them so they are automatically
>> available to the related tools (conflict detection, quick merge, run
>> C.I. on the patch, etc.)
>
> Why would anyone want to run CI on a patch sent from an arbitrary
> source?

Why do you assume that the source is arbitrary?

> Detecting conflicts should be trivial, but I don't understand what you
> refer to by "quick merge".

Merging by issuing a simple command, like pushing a button on a web
interface or sending an email with a keyword.