Re: small mistakes in unicode branch update

Re: small mistakes in unicode branch update

[Miles Bader]

Kenichi Handa <handa@m17n.org> writes:
> As those files are not modified in emacs-unicode-2 branch, please do
> whatever you think correct.

Ok, I've done those.  I also made some other changes which I don't think
will cause problems -- mostly updating files which apparently weren't
updated from the trunk in the latest merge.  Please tell me if you
notice anything weird.

There's now an emacs unicode arch branch, called:

   miles@gnu.org--gnu-2004/emacs--unicode--0

Available from the same place as my other emacs arch branches.

It will be kept updated from the emacs-unicode-2 CVS branch.

Thanks,

-Miles
-- 
`Cars give people wonderful freedom and increase their opportunities.
 But they also destroy the environment, to an extent so drastic that
 they kill all social life' (from _A Pattern Language_)

Re: small mistakes in unicode branch update

[Kenichi Handa]

In article <buohdvgflz0.fsf@mcspd15.ucom.lsi.nec.co.jp>, Miles Bader <miles@lsi.nec.co.jp> writes:
> Kenichi Handa <handa@m17n.org> writes:
>>  As those files are not modified in emacs-unicode-2 branch, please do
>>  whatever you think correct.

> Ok, I've done those.  I also made some other changes which I don't think
> will cause problems -- mostly updating files which apparently weren't
> updated from the trunk in the latest merge.  Please tell me if you
> notice anything weird.

Thank you.  For the moment, I see no problem.

> There's now an emacs unicode arch branch, called:

>    miles@gnu.org--gnu-2004/emacs--unicode--0

> Available from the same place as my other emacs arch branches.

> It will be kept updated from the emacs-unicode-2 CVS branch.

It seems that it is the branch Stephen mentioned in "Well,
you'll have to create an Arch branch first.", right?

---
Ken'ichi HANDA
handa@m17n.org

Re: small mistakes in unicode branch update

[Miles Bader]

On Mon, Apr 19, 2004 at 08:33:20PM +0900, Kenichi Handa wrote:
> >    miles@gnu.org--gnu-2004/emacs--unicode--0
> 
> > It will be kept updated from the emacs-unicode-2 CVS branch.
> 
> It seems that it is the branch Stephen mentioned in "Well,
> you'll have to create an Arch branch first.", right?

Yes, I guess so.

If you want to try to use arch for working on unicode emacs, you can either
use that branch, or make your own branches tagged off of it (note that
`tagging' in arch is fairly different than tagging in CVS), and occasionally
merge changes back the other direction.  Either way, commits to it will be
propagated back to CVS.

Another possible use is to keep the unicode branch up-to-date with respect to
the trunk by regularly merging from emacs--cvs-trunk--0 to emacs--unicode--0
(I do this about once week with my private branches).  Since the basic
mechanics of merging in arch are far less painful than in CVS, it's often a
good idea to merge often so that conflicts don't accumulate.

-Miles
-- 
Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it
has to be us.  -- Jerry Garcia

Re: small mistakes in unicode branch update

[Kenichi Handa]

In article <20040419130434.GA10902@fencepost>, Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org> writes:

> If you want to try to use arch for working on unicode emacs, you can either
> use that branch, or make your own branches tagged off of it (note that
> `tagging' in arch is fairly different than tagging in CVS), and occasionally
> merge changes back the other direction.  Either way, commits to it will be
> propagated back to CVS.

> Another possible use is to keep the unicode branch up-to-date with respect to
> the trunk by regularly merging from emacs--cvs-trunk--0 to emacs--unicode--0
> (I do this about once week with my private branches).  Since the basic
> mechanics of merging in arch are far less painful than in CVS, it's often a
> good idea to merge often so that conflicts don't accumulate.

Thank you for the info.  I'll do the latter.

---
Ken'ichi HANDA
handa@m17n.org