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: package and testing rant (was Re: package.el, auto-installation, and auto-removal) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 07:48:39 +0100 Message-ID: <87zjbwrk1k.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> References: <87a943umku.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87ppcvm7fj.fsf@newcastle.ac.uk> <87vbmndk46.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87wq72ls2h.fsf@ferrier.me.uk> <87k332lnn3.fsf_-_@ferrier.me.uk> <83fvdpn30d.fsf@gnu.org> <83bnodmxp7.fsf@gnu.org> <877fz1sjef.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87389pxfxg.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1415774952 25217 80.91.229.3 (12 Nov 2014 06:49:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 06:49:12 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 12 07:49:06 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 1XoRjl-0001Xf-BA for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 12 Nov 2014 07:49:05 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:52694 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XoRjk-0005HO-U2 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 12 Nov 2014 01:49:04 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33692) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XoRjZ-0005HJ-A0 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Nov 2014 01:48:54 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XoRjY-0007A4-6Y for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Nov 2014 01:48:53 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:45742) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XoRjY-0007A0-3F for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Nov 2014 01:48:52 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52918 helo=lola) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XoRjX-0006cb-AF; Wed, 12 Nov 2014 01:48:51 -0500 Original-Received: by lola (Postfix, from userid 1000) id E6073E04FD; Wed, 12 Nov 2014 07:48:39 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <87389pxfxg.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> (Stephen J. Turnbull's message of "Wed, 12 Nov 2014 12:20:59 +0900") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e 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:176797 Archived-At: "Stephen J. Turnbull" writes: > David Kastrup writes: > > > Git is not "for users". It is for developers. > > That, unfortunately, is a distinction that doesn't exist with git. But it exists with the Git repository of Emacs. > I have many students with no detectable neural activity as far as > software development goes keeping their theses in a group-accessible > git repo. That means I don't have to fish their content out of some > broken mail message, and it keeps a record of when they are actually > working on their documents. (If I could only get them to use Emacsen > and TeX so git diff would be useful! But that's another story.) Some > of them have actually discovered that the log is useful to them too! So they are using it as a developer repo. They are not using it as an archival system for generated files, and indeed Git very explicitly is not an archival system. The discussion to preserve file modification dates was there in its beginnings, and Git does not preserve them (and does not offer ways to preserve them) on purpose. > True, from the developer's POV, git is not a great way to distribute > products-with-source because it doesn't keep Make relationships up to > date. However, that doesn't mean it doesn't make a good way to > distribute product to users. Emacs' tarball is not a finished product. It needs to have some relations intact to maintain pregenerated info files and stuff. > Perhaps this tension could be addressed by having a "developer" branch > (which could be trunk = "master", of course) which assumes a complete > suite of tools for developers, and a "distribute" branch containing > products that require tools other than Emacs itself for users. Doesn't work since Git does not preserve file dates on checkout. > Thinking out loud, using the current "maintenance" branch as a > "distribute" branch might even work. With appropriate tools (to be > written AFAIK, unfortunately), you can recover (to a close > approximation) the necessary timestamp information to avoid > unnecessary rebuilding by Make, too. The tool is written already, of course. Make has some flag for touching everything instead of building it. But that would include non-version controlled binaries in the tree that have not been touched on the last checkout. -- David Kastrup