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: Mon, 30 Mar 2015 09:50:39 +0900 Message-ID: <87a8yvjokg.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> References: <86egoeusg2.fsf@example.com> <87384qzxqy.fsf@igel.home> <87h9t4kcaq.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <83pp7rzvq8.fsf@gnu.org> <87bnjbk7cj.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <83h9t3zmef.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1427676665 20980 80.91.229.3 (30 Mar 2015 00:51:05 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2015 00:51:05 +0000 (UTC) Cc: sva-news@mygooglest.com, schwab@suse.de, rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Mar 30 02:50:57 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 1YcNuo-00071x-8W for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 30 Mar 2015 02:50:54 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:58781 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YcNun-0001pD-Ji for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 29 Mar 2015 20:50:53 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55380) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YcNuk-0001o4-0Z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 29 Mar 2015 20:50:50 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YcNui-0002cB-Si for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 29 Mar 2015 20:50:49 -0400 Original-Received: from shako.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp ([130.158.97.161]:56698) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YcNud-0002b2-DD; Sun, 29 Mar 2015 20:50:43 -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 AFB061C385B; Mon, 30 Mar 2015 09:50:39 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 944D9120EC9; Mon, 30 Mar 2015 09:50:39 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: <83h9t3zmef.fsf@gnu.org> 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:184530 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: > You said, repeatedly, that the original instructions didn't use a > bound branch, but instead described a "truly distributed workflow". > That's factually incorrect. The latter part of the first sentence still is true; the workflow we described was truly distributed. That you lump them together in one statement as "factually incorrect" suggests that you really don't understand what you're talking about. In any case, Richard has seen the light and backed all the way down to a warning (which is not worth arguing against) and implementation of the missing vc-push command (which is a good idea). There's no point in continuing theoretical discussions just for you and Richard, who simply don't want to hear them.