From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: VC mode and git Date: Fri, 03 Apr 2015 02:54:53 +0900 Message-ID: <87a8yqiff6.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> References: <83twx2xoc8.fsf@gnu.org> <87619hke3u.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <551A3F17.6020903@math.ntnu.no> <20150331085055.GA2871@acm.fritz.box> <87zj6tiko1.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <20150331104935.GB2871@acm.fritz.box> <86ego5cp95.fsf@dod.no> <20150331154839.GE2871@acm.fritz.box> <87pp7phxt1.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <20150331204609.GG2871@acm.fritz.box> <87k2xwj11j.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <551B8DD0.1010800@math.ntnu.no> <87h9t0iam9.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1427997353 27665 80.91.229.3 (2 Apr 2015 17:55:53 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2015 17:55:53 +0000 (UTC) Cc: acm@muc.de, hanche@math.ntnu.no, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Apr 02 19:55:41 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 1YdjLA-00083C-4i for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 02 Apr 2015 19:55:40 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:59729 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YdjL9-00029N-KF for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 02 Apr 2015 13:55:39 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48315) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YdjKh-00026E-9e for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Apr 2015 13:55:12 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YdjKd-000250-0e for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Apr 2015 13:55:11 -0400 Original-Received: from shako.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp ([130.158.97.161]:55147) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YdjKc-0001nM-O1; Thu, 02 Apr 2015 13:55:06 -0400 Original-Received: from uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp [130.158.99.156]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by shako.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B15681C38B0; Fri, 3 Apr 2015 02:54:53 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 5E879120EC9; Fri, 3 Apr 2015 02:54:53 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: VM undefined under 21.5 (beta34) "kale" 83e5c3cd6be6 XEmacs Lucid (x86_64-unknown-linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 130.158.97.161 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:184799 Archived-At: Richard Stallman writes: > > In Richard's case, he > > testifies to weeks between pulls. > > That is the way I need to do it. There is nothing wrong with this, You protest too much. Nobody said that there was anything wrong with your timing of pulls. I'm sure most of us have projects where we often pull only with intervals of weeks or months. The question is how to deal with that. > and our previous version control systems supported it with no > trouble. Of course, git does too! What git doesn't do is support your CVS/bzr workflow without changes. git itself will resist incorporating the changes you want, I'm pretty sure. ESR has resisted the changes you suggest to vc.el. The easy road for you and Alan is to learn a git-adapted workflow, or perhaps adopt the hook that Stefan advocates[1]. (Really, it is easier.) If you two had spent as much effort learning git as you have on what has basically been a flamewar, you'd be have a reasonably problem-free (VCS) workflow already, without changing your programming workflows. IMHO YMMV, but actually implementing the changes will be a lot of work, and integration to the upstream projects will be an uphill battle. And that's why I think that what "everybody does" is relevant. You ask "why doesn't git (or vc.el) support the same workflow as CVS?" The answer is quite complicated, actually, but from your point of view can be proxied by "the maintainers don't want to". Since you are apparently a small minority and clearly "refusenik" in nature, the maintainers are hardly motivated to make efforts on your behalf. I believe it unlikely that there's little chance that vc.el will address your needs directly (and zero that git will). Your protests that there must be lots of developers like you is empirically unsupported (doesn't mean it's not true, just that your introspective evidence isn't a head count), and to some extent the maintainers believe supporting a CVS-style workflow is counterproductive. Specifically, there *is* a lot of evidence that people who have tried git-adapted workflows quickly learn to like them (even if they never learn to really like git!) I often get replies like "this is cool/ surprisingly effective, too bad it's not default/requires specifying an option/isn't more discoverable" when I help people tweak their workflows. I'm sure the maintainers get the same response only more so. Footnotes: [1] Apologies to the person who actually proposed it, I forget who you were.