From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dmitry Gutov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: On the subject of Git, Bazaar, and the future of Emacs development Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2013 20:32:47 +0400 Message-ID: <878v586bww.fsf@yandex.ru> References: <87hajxqlly.fsf@yandex.ru> <87li99b3xk.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1364401993 2537 80.91.229.3 (27 Mar 2013 16:33:13 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2013 16:33:13 +0000 (UTC) Cc: stephen@xemacs.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Allen S. Rout" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 27 17:33:38 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 1UKtI3-0006tG-Bh for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 27 Mar 2013 17:33:31 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:45104 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UKtHf-0002dD-AF for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 27 Mar 2013 12:33:07 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:43495) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UKtHY-0002ZF-Mb for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Mar 2013 12:33:05 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UKtHT-0000wR-S2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Mar 2013 12:33:00 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-la0-x22d.google.com ([2a00:1450:4010:c03::22d]:36344) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UKtHT-0000uu-Lf for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Mar 2013 12:32:55 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-la0-f45.google.com with SMTP id er20so15841093lab.4 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 2013 09:32:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:sender:from:to:cc:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references :user-agent:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type:x-antivirus :x-antivirus-status; bh=UMAn2H96mxnaH90EmqiJnrtf5JJIaqqwgvk+M57HufY=; b=m1CtUkLSl8VnHIHWutVlhOyAEQyQY4E3rpWngDOl+1bZ1uPe6uEAQ+B7fp78ncWACE Pm1sHqZLNLvHuYDjMAAQ/LmKRaKWBPftvsV4bNh7qatrElWXyBJniUQJwYyb3seVt2M1 3Cbt0W61Y70YsvCX2kCnNKaValAVSO9vKiMGwuBnmo1Eq19ToXZl5L+OainTtGh+rRWa NB8p+ewKoINvROmpCPEGx2HbcAtmSFEFz7G79FHIqWtY3Abs09rbTpzp6gfUcooZz8eY uvGNbYkNrASf5rKMsc1XEVim9gZRRYrPiV50HjxgTQo8NTTUadBQOVPNYpfvKjIMLmqr GNkA== X-Received: by 10.112.25.40 with SMTP id z8mr10511490lbf.20.1364401974623; Wed, 27 Mar 2013 09:32:54 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from SOL ([178.252.98.87]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id nv3sm6281798lbb.15.2013.03.27.09.32.52 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 27 Mar 2013 09:32:53 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: (Allen S. Rout's message of "Wed, 27 Mar 2013 11:49:07 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (windows-nt) X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 130327-0, 27.03.2013), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2a00:1450:4010:c03::22d 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:158314 Archived-At: "Allen S. Rout" writes: > On 03/27/2013 05:13 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: >> please go back and review the original discussion that led to >> selection of Bazaar. [...] >> > > Might some kind soul decorate this with e.g. a GMANE reference or other > similar? If I found the right discussion, these two messages: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/90798/focus=92070 http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/90798/focus=91330 seem to indicate that Bazaar was considered a good enough tech at the time, and that politics were coming second, or at least were not an overriding factor. If Bazaar had been in bad shape even then, I don't see anyone mentioning that in the discussion (admittedly, I haven't read every message).