From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Improving GNU ELPA Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2017 13:26:34 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87r2xg2wra.fsf@bernoul.li> <87pod02swk.fsf@bernoul.li> <87tw29ogxa.fsf@russet.org.uk> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1500398832 27666 195.159.176.226 (18 Jul 2017 17:27:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2017 17:27:12 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.0.50 (gnu/linux) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jul 18 19:27:02 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dXWGu-0006Yl-Ez for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 18 Jul 2017 19:26:56 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57935 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dXWGz-00038m-QD for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 18 Jul 2017 13:27:01 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42170) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dXWGt-00037R-8U for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Jul 2017 13:26:56 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dXWGq-0002QO-3J for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Jul 2017 13:26:55 -0400 Original-Received: from [195.159.176.226] (port=46438 helo=blaine.gmane.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dXWGp-0002OH-SL for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Jul 2017 13:26:52 -0400 Original-Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dXWGf-00061v-8b for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Jul 2017 19:26:41 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 24 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:I12J9YEft5UCzUhX4eSY+VQeEws= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 195.159.176.226 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:216851 Archived-At: >> There are no real rules, here, other than the fact that elpa.git may be >> modified by us directly, so if the maintainer decides to keep the >> "upstream" elsewhere it's his responsibility to deal with the fallout > This bit I don't like! You're not alone, so in general we should try to avoid it. > What sort of commits do you do locally? Not sure what you mean by "locally". Do you mean, what kinds of commits do we want to install directly into elpa.git (for those cases where the upstream is elsewhere)? Typically things like incorrect copyright notices or compilation breakage. > Would scripting something to branch, and do git-request-pull to the > upstream be a substitute? Nowadays, most of time I send a patch via email to the maintainer rather than committing directly. It's more tedious but since I now do much less janitorial work on elpa.git code it's OK. Stefan