From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Bozhidar Batsov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: PROPOSAL: Move to git, now that bzr is no longer a req. Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2014 20:05:19 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20140102095347.6834E381D0C@snark.thyrsus.com> <87fvp6bdd9.fsf_-_@ktab.red-bean.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e01294db2f11edb04ef00a2cb X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1388685933 25231 80.91.229.3 (2 Jan 2014 18:05:33 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2014 18:05:33 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel To: Karl Fogel Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jan 02 19:05:33 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 1Vyme5-0007w3-O5 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 02 Jan 2014 19:05:25 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:46414 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Vyme5-0000F9-AW for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 02 Jan 2014 13:05:25 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49229) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Vyme1-0000F1-F9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Jan 2014 13:05:22 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Vyme0-0007Tm-8Z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Jan 2014 13:05:21 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-ob0-x232.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4003:c01::232]:55381) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Vyme0-0007Ti-3o for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Jan 2014 13:05:20 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-ob0-f178.google.com with SMTP id uz6so14592903obc.23 for ; Thu, 02 Jan 2014 10:05:19 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=ASEs0sjS/BCujCPD10VvYkFk6JOqg8P2VJZTV9KZ8lY=; b=0m7X4/9qKh9M1qkGf3jT8WZ0lXrDelw3Oes96fd1xiAkaMEqXFJTkIqGNDeeP/u0VH 7Pq1qjsgSfpG12Ca2FE0eZLyeHFQApDfUvn6BFy6ucOkvSWMF1Eioz2Du6d9mRemHXX5 xW8RE7cvjg6GxCTcDdcfSPa8BfL6YSaLntO6vxUs7PNqniYTWW3Q8F9d78y8E9CDeTV8 mh33cr0C2hKiDAgMIZwpzZ1nllwTvNP0C/UKhaJhkKPfEsirWY9HE12WYycMQRiaMfeJ v6jcLeK1a8kNxqTLqbSC3nwSc0KGksrbpvamw8HRlltHIHOTprSG3n5zpSkmwEj1DMcm OxQg== X-Received: by 10.60.56.137 with SMTP id a9mr1078560oeq.75.1388685919589; Thu, 02 Jan 2014 10:05:19 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.76.109.98 with HTTP; Thu, 2 Jan 2014 10:05:19 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <87fvp6bdd9.fsf_-_@ktab.red-bean.com> X-Google-Sender-Auth: RYGTC8pNKygFX0EE75M4hOIElZE X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:4003:c01::232 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:167053 Archived-At: --089e01294db2f11edb04ef00a2cb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 +1 from me for migration to git. On 2 January 2014 17:41, Karl Fogel wrote: > Richard Stallman writes: > >I don't insist that Emacs should stay with bzr. I chose to support > >bzr because it was still a contender at the time. > > Now that RMS has dropped the bzr requirement, I propose we move to git. > ESR has graciously offered to be technical lead for such a migration. > > Does anyone think we should stay on bzr, or choose a VCS other than git? > > If there is significant support for a different system, then I guess we > should hold a poll. But my (tentative) expectation is that there will > be a pretty clear overall group preference for git -- I'm mainly posting > this so there's a place for people to follow up to express their > preference, so we can quickly get a sense of whether moving to git is > the obvious call for the group as a whole, not just for those of us who > have been been expressing that preference for some time. > > -Karl > > --089e01294db2f11edb04ef00a2cb Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
+1 from me for migration to git.

On 2 January 2014 17:41, Karl Fogel <kfo= gel@red-bean.com> wrote:
Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:
>I don't insist that Emacs should stay with bzr. =C2=A0I chose to su= pport
>bzr because it was still a contender at the time.

Now that RMS has dropped the bzr requirement, I propose we move to git.
ESR has graciously offered to be technical lead for such a migration.

Does anyone think we should stay on bzr, or choose a VCS other than git?
If there is significant support for a different system, then I guess we
should hold a poll. =C2=A0But my (tentative) expectation is that there will=
be a pretty clear overall group preference for git -- I'm mainly postin= g
this so there's a place for people to follow up to express their
preference, so we can quickly get a sense of whether moving to git is
the obvious call for the group as a whole, not just for those of us who
have been been expressing that preference for some time.

-Karl


--089e01294db2f11edb04ef00a2cb--