From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Karl Fogel Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: bzr repository ready? Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 10:50:48 -0500 Message-ID: <87k58cg5d3.fsf@red-bean.com> References: <87zli4jcc4.fsf@workhorse.earlhome> <87vdsrjcco.fsf@workhorse.earlhome> <87fxjgb4ud.fsf_-_@red-bean.com> <87eiyy3lag.fsf@notengoamigos.org> <87bpu1451m.fsf@red-bean.com> <874ozs34c6.fsf@notengoamigos.org> <87k58nyih3.fsf@red-bean.com> <87ocxxrjnh.fsf@canonical.com> <874ozp4ld3.fsf@notengoamigos.org> <87ocxrgm4g.fsf@canonical.com> <87ocxqqx1y.fsf@CPU107.opentrends.net> <874ozi7z5u.fsf@red-bean.com> <200901291850.n0TIoa10015665@rodan.ics.uci.edu> <87d4e57tom.fsf@red-bean.com> <200901300906.n0U96p6m022469@rodan.ics.uci.edu> Reply-To: Karl Fogel NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1233330667 8336 80.91.229.12 (30 Jan 2009 15:51:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 15:51:07 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jan 30 16:52:21 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1LSvfF-0006T8-BA for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2009 16:52:17 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46554 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LSvdx-00030H-27 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2009 10:50:57 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LSvdt-00030B-As for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2009 10:50:53 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LSvdr-0002zz-0C for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2009 10:50:52 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=50987 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LSvdq-0002zw-QK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2009 10:50:50 -0500 Original-Received: from sanpietro.red-bean.com ([66.146.193.61]:51387) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LSvdq-0007On-60 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2009 10:50:50 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34504 helo=floss ident=kfogel) by sanpietro.red-bean.com with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1LSvdp-00014t-0T for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2009 09:50:49 -0600 In-Reply-To: <200901300906.n0U96p6m022469@rodan.ics.uci.edu> (Dan Nicolaescu's message of "Fri, 30 Jan 2009 01:06:51 -0800 (PST)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:108410 Archived-At: Dan Nicolaescu writes: > No idea, but who said anything about blocking? Sorry -- didn't mean to jump to conclusions. > But it's a bit worrying that even bugs that should be very easy to fix > (like the diff bug) don't get addressed... Oh, that doesn't worry me so much. Like any active project (say, Emacs, *cough* *cough* :-) ) bzr gets more bug reports than it can process. Triage is eternal. There are many bugs that are "easy to fix", but developer attention is still finite, and of course each fix needs a regression test, which is frequently more work than the bugfix itself. I have my eye on the diff bug. The only reason I haven't started it is that I want to a) finish this switchover work first, which is not non-trivial, and b) finish #306394, which also affects Emacs in particular. The 'log SUBDIR' bug #97715 is deeper, and like #246891 ('log -v is slow') it requires structural changes under the hood. (I mention those two together because 'log -v' would otherwise have been a workaround for #97715.) I'll do what I can to push those along. -Karl