From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Syncing Gnus and Emacs repositories Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 18:25:57 -0400 Message-ID: References: <6sps3z32ap.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87tztbcue9.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87lkemmrg4.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <18033.64249.816850.550250@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <85ejkcq32v.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <85k5u4nlrh.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <85ir9lkfhk.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <18038.8116.557082.213153@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1182292041 3458 80.91.229.12 (19 Jun 2007 22:27:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 22:27:21 +0000 (UTC) Cc: nickrob@snap.net.nz, emacs-devel@gnu.org, handa@m17n.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jun 20 00:27:20 2007 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 1I0mAR-0003l7-VP for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 20 Jun 2007 00:27:20 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I0mAR-00048m-Gn for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 19 Jun 2007 18:27:19 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1I0m9B-0003BH-Ck for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Jun 2007 18:26:01 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1I0m99-0003AJ-UV for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Jun 2007 18:26:00 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I0m99-0003AE-Mf for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Jun 2007 18:25:59 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1I0m99-000539-24 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Jun 2007 18:25:59 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1I0m97-0000jG-OK; Tue, 19 Jun 2007 18:25:57 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Eli Zaretskii on Mon, 18 Jun 2007 22:12:37 +0300) X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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:73346 Archived-At: > However, it might be a problem if the changes on the branch break > things. If they break the Unicode branch, they will break the trunk when the Unicode branch is merged into it. So I see no disadvantage here. I agree. Also, if a package is installed in unicode-2 and has a bad interaction with part of unicode-2, people will have a chance to fix the bug within unicode-2 before the merge. If several such things get installed into unicode over a period of a month or two, fixing their bugs will also be spread over a month or two. That won't be stressful. However, if these same packages are installed in the trunk instead, then merging unicode-2 will provoke all the bugs at once, which would be rather unpleasant. By contrast, if we