From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Bastien Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: patch vs. overwrite in bzr Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2012 10:29:13 +0200 Message-ID: <87zkapi7qe.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87k42cwys8.fsf@gnu.org> <87limhuldm.fsf@gnu.org> <871uo7g4j6.fsf@gnu.org> <87iphjhbm8.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87398lgrat.fsf_-_@niu.edu> <871uo5c7r0.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87pqbpj5j3.fsf@altern.org> <87aa2szgig.fsf@gnu.org> <87ehs4yrhz.fsf@gnu.org> <83k41vctyg.fsf@gnu.org> <83aa2rcnww.fsf@gnu.org> <8362dedgcb.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1333700901 25846 80.91.229.3 (6 Apr 2012 08:28:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2012 08:28:21 +0000 (UTC) Cc: eliz@gnu.org, Stefan Monnier , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Apr 06 10:28:19 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 1SG4Wn-0003BR-QT for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 06 Apr 2012 10:28:17 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:44517 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SG4Wm-0006Ij-Ne for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 06 Apr 2012 04:28:16 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:54496) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SG4Wi-0006IY-Tg for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Apr 2012 04:28:14 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SG4Wh-0001sq-01 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Apr 2012 04:28:12 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-wg0-f49.google.com ([74.125.82.49]:45269) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SG4WZ-0001s0-8d; Fri, 06 Apr 2012 04:28:03 -0400 Original-Received: by wgbdr1 with SMTP id dr1so1494711wgb.30 for ; Fri, 06 Apr 2012 01:27:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:user-agent:date :message-id:mime-version:content-type; bh=KK73KcbjZG6ZVWtKOFgNGmWUe9GP1+C5V0aXn1j9Jy4=; b=ANXMnuEYJAapHrKIVazmU0RsWWQsd1Bqy4PFABzC5+TVG5ILfvYaFI/OwToQlTBfA7 m5NfcOqIQ61mETB6elOCuRgrG2cBogxAWddZBTUUBGJ5fKyoPrSt+PHpSIqR1SN4EjWu /pGd0wtUSbpdngH15zhzF/0UOXuZQ0RT/ynBhV2GbdmwBnVYVlevPV4BXKSHicRjfxVD KXjNS+pAX5uxmtC+fdyOY2EHAXJeHn3Au9AwCcBiuXC1gljf3rMS12b/VxKL6SbLyRwd M1vGS9hJq5XTt1gPupQkuehfjKkBQHskdeAobRBS5yt3BbcV4AKxJFoyzaXe+QlIL7X5 Dp1w== Original-Received: by 10.180.24.35 with SMTP id r3mr18013190wif.7.1333700879673; Fri, 06 Apr 2012 01:27:59 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from myhost.localdomain (pha75-11-82-236-86-204.fbx.proxad.net. [82.236.86.204]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 6sm4372643wiz.1.2012.04.06.01.27.58 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 06 Apr 2012 01:27:58 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by myhost.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 67AD8856E; Fri, 6 Apr 2012 10:29:14 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Fri, 06 Apr 2012 03:13:09 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.94 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 74.125.82.49 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:149417 Archived-At: Richard Stallman writes: > That amounts to using the Emacs repository is the canonical repository > for Gnus, ERC, CEDET, MH-E, Org, ... > But they don't want to do that, often for good reasons (legal, > practical, ...). As I see it, the main reason for Org to use a separate repository is to gather an active community around a central place. Regular Org testers don't want to rebuild Emacs each time they have to test a new feature in Org. The second main reason is completely subjective: I prefer git over bzr and I want to maintain Org using git. > If there is a legal reason for this, doesn't that imply a problem of > some kind already exists? We need to find out what the claimed legal > reasons are, and think about whether they indicate legal problems for > Emacs development. There is no legal reason for not using the Emacs repository as the canonical repository for Org. Just a practical one: doing so would force us to maintain the canonical Org repository in Emacs *and* another repository for things that are useful to Org and that cannot be part of Emacs. > As for practical reasons, doesn't the flexibility of a DVCS > make them go away? Above legal (unknown) reasons, and above practical reasons, there is this community-based argument I stated above, which is IMHO the most important. -- Bastien