From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Syncing Gnus and Emacs repositories Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 09:24:58 +0200 Message-ID: <864pl53et1.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> References: <6sps3z32ap.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87tztbcue9.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87lkemmrg4.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <18033.64249.816850.550250@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <85ejkcq32v.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <85k5u4nlrh.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <878xahbvoq.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1182151509 29309 80.91.229.12 (18 Jun 2007 07:25:09 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 07:25:09 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jun 18 09:25:06 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1I0Bbl-0004cv-JA for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 09:25:05 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I0Bbl-0008Nm-3k for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 03:25:05 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1I0Bbh-0008NC-9d for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 03:25:01 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1I0Bbg-0008N0-VC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 03:25:01 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I0Bbg-0008Mx-NY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 03:25:00 -0400 Original-Received: from pc3.berlin.powerweb.de ([62.67.228.11]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1I0Bbg-0004Jv-9b for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 03:25:00 -0400 Original-Received: from quinscape.de (dslnet.212-29-44.ip210.dokom.de [212.29.44.210] (may be forged)) by pc3.berlin.powerweb.de (8.9.3p3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA11662 for ; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 09:24:58 +0200 X-Delivered-To: Original-Received: (qmail 4058 invoked from network); 18 Jun 2007 07:24:58 -0000 Original-Received: from unknown (HELO lola.quinscape.zz) ([10.0.3.43]) (envelope-sender ) by ns.quinscape.de (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 18 Jun 2007 07:24:58 -0000 Original-Received: by lola.quinscape.zz (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 8347C8EA27; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 09:24:58 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <878xahbvoq.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> (Stephen J. Turnbull's message of "Mon\, 18 Jun 2007 15\:53\:09 +0900") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/23.0.51 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.4-2.6 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:73214 Archived-At: "Stephen J. Turnbull" writes: [Relevant experience, thanks for that.] > If Richard sustains his veto of merging emacs-unicode-2 and other > potentially destabilizing work on the trunk, then, based on that > experience, I see only two practical choices. (1) Accept that the > trunk will stay in feature slush for a while, and work on the > branch(es) that interest you in separate workspaces until permission > is given to merge to trunk. (2) Switch to a distributed SCM like > Arch or git for cooperative work on merged workspaces, and use CVS > only to maintain continuity of communication with the rest of the > world and those whose current work is focused on the 22.x branch or > features admissible on the trunk in CVS. (Subversion is not a > panacea here.) Subversion would not really help since it is basically "CVS done right" (TM) and thus the problems are similar. Distributed SCMs are actually not a matter of developer policy: the adoption of them basically remains the individuals' choice. I am currently fighting with git-archimport in order to get a useful starting point for working with multi-tty and its history, but might have to do a direct CVS import into git instead. -- David Kastrup