From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Alan Mackenzie Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [Emacs-diffs] master 4e23cd0 4/5: * mail/rmail.el (rmail-show-message-1): When displaying a mime message, Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2015 20:11:14 +0000 Message-ID: <20150407201114.GB2600@acm.fritz.box> References: <83mw2mn2no.fsf@gnu.org> <5521359D.2000509@yandex.ru> <83fv8emvgq.fsf@gnu.org> <55219139.8040507@yandex.ru> <83oan2l4pk.fsf@gnu.org> <5521B811.8070603@yandex.ru> <83d23hlmia.fsf@gnu.org> <20150407165131.GA2600@acm.fritz.box> <836197j20b.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1428437654 9010 80.91.229.3 (7 Apr 2015 20:14:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2015 20:14:14 +0000 (UTC) Cc: rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Apr 07 22:14:06 2015 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 1YfZsr-0001jC-5d for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 07 Apr 2015 22:14:05 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48692 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YfZsq-0006dC-6T for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 07 Apr 2015 16:14:04 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37890) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YfZqL-0002SN-U2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Apr 2015 16:11:30 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YfZqG-00005a-Kj for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Apr 2015 16:11:29 -0400 Original-Received: from colin.muc.de ([193.149.48.1]:36185 helo=mail.muc.de) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YfZqG-00004x-5a for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Apr 2015 16:11:24 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail 62251 invoked by uid 3782); 7 Apr 2015 20:11:20 -0000 Original-Received: from acm.muc.de (pD9519368.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [217.81.147.104]) by colin.muc.de (tmda-ofmipd) with ESMTP; Tue, 07 Apr 2015 22:11:19 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 4302 invoked by uid 1000); 7 Apr 2015 20:11:14 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <836197j20b.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-Delivery-Agent: TMDA/1.1.12 (Macallan) X-Primary-Address: acm@muc.de X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: FreeBSD 9.x X-Received-From: 193.149.48.1 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:185109 Archived-At: Hello, Eli. On Tue, Apr 07, 2015 at 08:12:52PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > Alan, if you have a few moments to spare, could you read > GitQuickStartForEmacsDevs and see if the current procedures there > appeal to you (or maybe even tell you something useful you didn't > already know)? Your comments will be appreciated. > TIA First impression (though I have glanced at it quite a few times in passing): it's a good simple intro to git. Small point: one of the examples commits a ChangeLog, which as from today, we don't do any more. Bigger point: the workflow depicted implicitly assumes that _all_ changes made to files are to be committed in one commit action. I think it would be better if this was stated explicitly, with a sentence like "The following commands assume _all_ the changes you have made to any files will be committed together." immediately under the heading "Daily Work". I would naturally prefer the commands only to commit specified files (I work this way), but I can appreciate not wanting the guide to get complicated. I actually use git stash rather than commits with messages like "Commit to allow pull from upstream."; I find it the lesser of two evils - I don't think one should have to commit unnaturally because of constraints in the tools. I think the sub-workflow git stash; git pull; git stash pop might be worth mentioning. It might be useful to mention "git checkout foo.el" as doing what we used to know as "bzr revert foo.el", perhaps under the "If you made a mistake" section. I remember I had to ask for this command on emacs-devel, once. -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).