Re: recent changes to org files

[Carsten Dominik <carsten.dominik@gmail.com>]

On Oct 23, 2007, at 2:06 PM, Juanma Barranquero wrote:

> On 10/23/07, Carsten Dominik <carsten.dominik@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I was referring to this statement.  It is not enough to install only
>> patches,
>> I also need to actively monitor changes that are made by others.
>
> OK, now I understand. Thanks.
>
> However, someone has to track the changes. Either you track the
> changes in the CVS, or whomever intends to fix or change anything in
> the CVS must check that his changes don't conflict with your version
> (and that makes having Org in the CVS somewhat irrelevant), or the
> person goes ahead, does the change and sends it to you (and then, if
> your copy varies much faster than the CVS one, conflicts are bound to
> happen and effort is wasted).

Well, I am doing this.  I am checking changes made in the CVS and
incorporate them into my copy.  I never said that I was not doing this.
I don't know how this discussion came to suggest that I am not doing
it.

However, I made a mistake, partly because too many people made a
mistake became involved in the loop and my own versioning system
seems not good enough.  I will work on this, but I do make mistakes.
And: it would be helpful for me if there was a system through which I
could automatically get patches of changes to Emacs CVS versions
of my files.  I don't think it is too much to ask.  Regulars in the  
emacs
development community probably know that, even though org is
very stable and has only had very few bug reports inside Emacs,
I am still making big changes often.  So notification, better a request
for double checking changes to the files from others is, I think,
reasonable to ask for.

- Carsten