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: Trunk still not open Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 10:55:32 +0900 Message-ID: <87ha70kyy3.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> References: <6xwqfxhl88.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <83txb1mcsy.fsf@gnu.org> <87siqlku0i.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87wqfxari2.fsf@yandex.ru> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1394848540 19134 80.91.229.3 (15 Mar 2014 01:55:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 01:55:40 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, Dmitry Gutov To: Glenn Morris Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Mar 15 02:55:50 2014 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 1WOdpG-0005Ag-0L for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 15 Mar 2014 02:55:50 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48109 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WOdpF-0003EF-97 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 21:55:49 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42412) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WOdp7-00035V-Hf for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 21:55:47 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WOdp1-0007TU-Ld for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 21:55:41 -0400 Original-Received: from mgmt2.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp ([130.158.97.224]:56962) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WOdp0-0007SU-Vf; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 21:55:35 -0400 Original-Received: from uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp [130.158.99.156]) by mgmt2.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31FBB970945; Sat, 15 Mar 2014 10:55:32 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 2462A1A28DC; Sat, 15 Mar 2014 10:55:32 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: VM undefined under 21.5 (beta34) "kale" 2a0f42961ed4 XEmacs Lucid (x86_64-unknown-linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 130.158.97.224 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:170373 Archived-At: Glenn Morris writes: > Dmitry Gutov wrote: > > > I really wish the project went with "no-push-without-tests" requirement > > instead, first. > > That is a separate issue. I'd like it not to sidetrack this discussion. > > (I previously asked for more people to write tests: > > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2013-06/msg00995.html > > Not much happened, except that a bunch of people wrote a bunch of > emails, like always, and nobody did anything. I am sure that is not true, and Daniel documents that. What is true is that it is not enough, and that is because the maintainership did not have the stomach for *requiring* tests. (And I agree with that decision, for now. Especially because docs come first, and traditionally have been important to GNU and Emacs in particular.) >> As for docs, I apologize (being one of the culprits), but as I >> rarely, if ever, read the manual, one can understand how I can >> forget its existence from time to time. > > I hope you will change your mindset so that you view the > documentation as central to Emacs. Why hope? If the maintainers collectively set this as a rule, I'm sure Stefan will follow the rule conscientiously, like everybody else. Without a rule, it's easy to make excuses for yourself. Stefan may not, I actually suspect he will exert himself to set an example. But that still means way too much code will be added without high-quality documentation, and sometimes essentially undocumented, because statistically only a minority will exert themselves. I believe that the docs rule is actually pretty low-cost to Emacs developers as shown by the tradition of high-quality documentation. Why not give it a try, and tackle the much more costly task of encouraging then requiring testing when a docs rule succeeds?