From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: On the subject of Git, Bazaar, and the future of Emacs development Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2013 19:35:25 +0300 Message-ID: <834nfoki0i.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87hajxqlly.fsf@yandex.ru> <20130401202613.0b4201e3@anarchist> <878v51aa2l.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <80939D90-D007-4828-A622-C264E5FE27EB@mit.edu> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1364920498 24819 80.91.229.3 (2 Apr 2013 16:34:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2013 16:34:58 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: chad Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Apr 02 18:35:25 2013 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 1UN4BB-0005SI-HX for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 02 Apr 2013 18:35:25 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:41964 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UN4Am-0005qD-T4 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 02 Apr 2013 12:35:00 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:37379) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UN4Aj-0005mY-7V for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Apr 2013 12:34:58 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UN4Ah-0005Fz-S8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Apr 2013 12:34:57 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il ([80.179.55.172]:35309) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UN4Ah-0005FZ-KG for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Apr 2013 12:34:55 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0MKM00E00Z6TA800@a-mtaout22.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Apr 2013 19:34:53 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0MKM00E5ZZE53L40@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Tue, 02 Apr 2013 19:34:53 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: <80939D90-D007-4828-A622-C264E5FE27EB@mit.edu> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 X-Received-From: 80.179.55.172 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:158548 Archived-At: > From: chad > Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2013 01:25:41 -0700 > Cc: Barry Warsaw , "Stephen J. Turnbull" > > On 01 Apr 2013, at 20:24, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > > Bzr itself is Not Simple, and until it effectively stagnated, was > also not especially stable. The internal models are relatively > complex, allowing bazaar to handle many different workflows, and > the structures (for example, the repository layout) were changing > relatively frequently. When Emacs adopted bazaar, bzr was on the > cusp of a big change, with another on the horizon (looms was one > candidate; I've forgotten the name of the other). > > As things slowed down inside bzr, the barriers to entry went up,rather > than down. Patches sat around bit-rotting rather than being included > or rejected, which made it hard (at least conceptually) to get up > to speed with the project. At the same time, the core thinned (Martin > Pool, for example). That reminds me of another project I'm familiar with: Emacs. It is definitely "Not Simple", and the development versions many people use every day are not terribly stable, either. "Complex internal models"? we've got more than bzr could ever dream of. I'm hacking the display engine since 2008, and it still surprises me from time to time. "Frequent changes in structures"? you betcha, just look at the logs from the last month. "Thin core"? the guy who implemented the display engine is no longer with us, since 10 years ago, and the couple of others who knew a lot about redisplay are not active for at least 5 years. If I were reasoning like you do, I'd never have written the bidirectional display code. Why did I? Because (1) it was a feature I lacked in Emacs and knew I would use when it's available, and (2) it pissed me off to have to use those "other tools" whenever I needed this feature. IOW, I was motivated, and also experienced enough in the programming paradigms required to do the job, however hard (it eventually took me 2 full years). Doesn't this remind you something?