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: New build process? Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 10:51:29 +0200 Organization: Organization?!? Message-ID: <87aac02jji.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> References: <20110726184220.GA6390@acm.acm> <87bowg6fre.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <4E2F2084.7070001@gmail.com> <87sjpsdtaa.fsf@micropit.couberia.bzh> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1311756716 28318 80.91.229.12 (27 Jul 2011 08:51:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 08:51:56 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jul 27 10:51:51 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QlzqI-0003c2-8c for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 10:51:50 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:47328 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QlzqH-0007Ze-Qu for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 04:51:49 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:54767) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QlzqF-0007ZK-0I for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 04:51:47 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QlzqE-0001ak-4Z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 04:51:46 -0400 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:35744) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QlzqD-0001aV-Rr for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 04:51:46 -0400 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QlzqC-0003aP-MP for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 10:51:44 +0200 Original-Received: from p508eac21.dip.t-dialin.net ([80.142.172.33]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 10:51:44 +0200 Original-Received: from dak by p508eac21.dip.t-dialin.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 10:51:44 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 39 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: p508eac21.dip.t-dialin.net X-Face: 2FEFf>]>q>2iw=B6, xrUubRI>pR&Ml9=ao@P@i)L:\urd*t9M~y1^:+Y]'C0~{mAl`oQuAl \!3KEIp?*w`|bL5qr,H)LFO6Q=qx~iH4DN; i"; /yuIsqbLLCh/!U#X[S~(5eZ41to5f%E@'ELIi$t^ Vc\LWP@J5p^rst0+('>Er0=^1{]M9!p?&:\z]|;&=NP3AhB!B_bi^]Pfkw User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:HTuOKXU6GyeZ0pyesdvz6c6chE8= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 80.91.229.12 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:142360 Archived-At: pmlists@free.fr (Peter Münster) writes: > On Wed, Jul 27 2011, Tim Cross wrote: > >> Still, my main pint is I don't think we should get too carried away >> trying to automate all of this. It is a common requirement and while >> some may have been caught out, it is something you should expect when >> working this close to the development layer. Efforts were made to >> communicate the changes on this list (by you IIRC Eli) and there is >> information in the INSTALL.BZR file. My objection with trying to >> automate or eliminate this simple step is that the solution can often >> be worse than the problem and adds just another point of potential >> failure in a step which is already simple and straight-forward (once >> you know about it!). > > +1 > > >> However, if we can rename the file or make >> another copy of the instructions under a name which the majority feel >> is more likely to be noticed, great - all for that. > > I don't see a big problem with the file name, but eventually you could > merge its content into INSTALL and then remove INSTALL.BZR. INSTALL are the instructions for a user installing from a tarball, so they should likely not be overly complicated. It does not harm to put a sentence referring to INSTALL.BZR in, but INSTALL.BZR does not actually need to be in a tarball. I actually have a project where INSTALL is autogenerated from something like doc/install.texi, so there is not even an INSTALL file in the repository. It is, naturally, in the tarballs. I think we nowadays distribute INSTALL.CVS along in the tarballs, though at one time we didn't. -- David Kastrup