From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Juanma Barranquero" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: whither GNU Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 12:21:40 +0200 Message-ID: References: <10697146.3630221218551689983.JavaMail.www@wwinf4615> <87d4k6qm9g.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87r68kr1v5.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <48AE09B2.3080900@emf.net> <4eb0089f0808212040x33b77760id935e79982c85eee@mail.gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1219401616 3537 80.91.229.12 (22 Aug 2008 10:40:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 10:40:16 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "David Robinow" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Aug 22 12:41:08 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KWU4o-00081m-2R for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 22 Aug 2008 12:41:06 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33416 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KWU3q-00043a-4H for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 22 Aug 2008 06:40:06 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KWTm9-0003sd-RY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 22 Aug 2008 06:21:49 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KWTm3-0003qL-LM for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 22 Aug 2008 06:21:48 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=50962 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KWTm2-0003pp-V4 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 22 Aug 2008 06:21:43 -0400 Original-Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com ([64.233.182.186]:56297) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KWTm2-0005Iz-Vm for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 22 Aug 2008 06:21:43 -0400 Original-Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id c7so192961nfi.26 for ; Fri, 22 Aug 2008 03:21:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=oIqxQZCnxAUCaEJ2HtTmv1c+OrhQbFpfr37YvkIM8qQ=; b=rkHQwSh/t8CjzgXlF83gDsTO4DokmnfC1QOuslyZXC6F9V7V0Ok4tbro7e/lPX/GkR v1o0HIJsm7jBYK3e5V/3eiICi7WKpfIxRny6+OzTrSqUkU9woeC1JYIrypi2CV3+zTT6 ToQ1TkMEgW/l1MP/tCYzCK6RklIrJYiOj+78o= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=CItADZxaUrt+xyyb/ipstv3lyYd0HQ8C69C7X87a4dx+tmDvCXD15bctrL1x77U3vG N+rjJu4wSK141n7EYjcV/C0kxvnXnw3985A73zwjviduEc8NYq6Xoxxn01P8FATHv1CE TI4CyigNCuIkYDB9f4xSDjf0bj1hPtQ7XXuCQ= Original-Received: by 10.210.59.14 with SMTP id h14mr1273643eba.50.1219400500577; Fri, 22 Aug 2008 03:21:40 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.210.23.12 with HTTP; Fri, 22 Aug 2008 03:21:40 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4eb0089f0808212040x33b77760id935e79982c85eee@mail.gmail.com> Content-Disposition: inline X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:102816 Archived-At: On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 05:40, David Robinow wrote: > No, that's a separate issue. I don't think so. I was answering to that specific point: that some GNU projects do double duty. bzr was chosen as a political statement, so its role as message took priority over technical quality (its technical quality, and those of the alternatives). > Thomas is referring to the (unnecessary) > war against non-free software having preference over the improvement > of free software. I've been reading the thread. > The choice of bzr was perfectly reasonable. Emacs and bzr are part of > the GNU community. The choice has increased the "market share" of bzr > and has already led to improvements. You're agreeing with Tom: the choice of bzr was "perfectly reasonable" for political, not technical, reasons. > Are there still problems? I don't know. I haven't used it yet. If you > find any you should file a bug report. I have used it. Perhaps that's why it's a bit more difficult for me to consider it a perfectly reasonable choice. (I'm not trying to restart that debate, though; I'm just agreeing with Tom on a very specific point of his very interesting thoughts). Juanma