From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jambunathan K Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Git mirrors Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 10:43:13 +0530 Message-ID: <811uuaq3va.fsf@gmail.com> References: <871uuksdxi.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87lissh32y.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87zkh8e286.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <87d3e4gttq.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87ehyjrhxh.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87d3e2rfte.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <878voqfiaw.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87zkh4bhho.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87y5wonpmn.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87y5wkosuh.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <877h43h8pp.fsf@gmail.com> <87mxczow43.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1318914842 9560 80.91.229.12 (18 Oct 2011 05:14:02 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 05:14:02 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Vijay Lakshminarayanan , =?utf-8?Q?=C3=93scar?= Fuentes , emacs-devel@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org, Juanma Barranquero To: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Oct 18 07:13:57 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RG1zv-0007UZ-8U for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 07:13:55 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38881 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RG1zu-0004vG-Cf for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 01:13:54 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:34170) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RG1zs-0004vB-34 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 01:13:53 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RG1zq-0007iP-O8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 01:13:52 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-gy0-f169.google.com ([209.85.160.169]:65004) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RG1zq-0007iJ-Dy; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 01:13:50 -0400 Original-Received: by gyf3 with SMTP id 3so251700gyf.0 for ; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 22:13:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:mail-followup-to:date:in-reply-to :message-id:user-agent:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=3glfvTsiMumm528BMt5sURThsGrT5LsVMlDRd1NMCqU=; b=CmNMNadrAre1HLhBcKHpF+ImD5YTe5RGKHe7m+czzDVF/3DwDx+BXhJkCBcMFWP/qq eeg/iLFy5byt8GFiks0vbYn2ee+TroGFz5Dibc1IKZoOFTD6MTHMRwcfZ6pPfYOjdFWh dgeLKHGUFqnVz1hNXaWlLMfIS99lI5PLuf9BA= Original-Received: by 10.68.15.234 with SMTP id a10mr2513288pbd.10.1318914829667; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 22:13:49 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from JAMBU-NETBOOK ([115.184.63.222]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id h5sm3471294pbq.11.2011.10.17.22.13.32 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 17 Oct 2011 22:13:46 -0700 (PDT) Mail-Followup-To: "Stephen J. Turnbull" , Vijay Lakshminarayanan , =?utf-8?Q?=C3=93scar?= Fuentes , Juanma Barranquero , rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org In-Reply-To: <87mxczow43.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> (Stephen J. Turnbull's message of "Tue, 18 Oct 2011 11:46:04 +0900") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (windows-nt) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Received-From: 209.85.160.169 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:145288 Archived-At: "Stephen J. Turnbull" writes: > Vijay Lakshminarayanan writes: > > > I think =C3=93scar's questions have been answered. > > Not at all. The "why" of the policy has not been touched by anybody, > except by an appeal to authority and circular arguments. The way it works in a social setup is someone complains, it is noted but *not* acted upon *immediately*. Someone else complains sometime later. It gets noted again but *nothing* happens. More people start complaining at which point the contentious issue gets some primacy. The policy may be reviewed and changes may be effected *going forward*. (Note: "A complaint" in the eariler para could also be replaced with "a leak in the system" or an "exeptional scenario or a situation".) This is how incremental adjustments are made to policy/law etc once there is a base working model. So in respect of incremental improvements based on observing the system behaviour, a policy/law is not unlike software. I would summarize Oscar's arguments as follows - This is Oscar speaking - The *existing precedent* of a GNU project encouraging a sister project (by using it) solely based on the sister project's license criterion (or ideological affirmations) has implications for adoption of the project in question. Has this consideration been factored in to while the current precedent was set in motion. If not - which I am confident is the case - can this situation be changed? Emacs is a mature and already a popular project so the impact on "adoption" does not arise. What if the project in question is a *totally* new or the "in works" GNU project - arguably a project labelled as "high priority". Will it's adoption suffer merely because it went with a lesser known and not so popular VCS. > I beg you to look harder. Any number of good things will come of it, > though not necessarily directly beneficial to Emacs. In particular, > *you* learned something, but there are other benefits, including a > better understanding of a central tool in the workflow, and off-list > negotiations to better promote the GNU Project. IMO, the reason Oscar continued to exchange mails was this: an implicit assumption that the existing system will be overthrown or replaced as soon as his request/warning is registered. This is not how things work.=20 If something is not "utterly" broken, it is not going to be fixed immediately or fixed at all. bzr isn't broken and it would be naive of anyone to expect that it will be replaced.=20 The reason others - the experienced ones, such as Stephen or others - continued to exchange mails was to throw some weight around the argument, to refine their own understanding or to share or discover new facts or simply to help Oscar articulate his ideas better or to stress test his arguments to see whether it withstands some onslaught. On the whole, the discussion was a healthy one even though it veered a bit. Jambunathan K. --=20