From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: base Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2010 02:38:43 -0400 Message-ID: References: <20100822120642.GA1794@muc.de> <87bp8uzu9d.fsf@mithlond.arda> <871v9o7dmf.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87wrrg5rzg.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87r5ho5gyr.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87hbij6hib.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <874oejq4zn.fsf@mid.gehheimdienst.de> <87fwy35n11.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1282718680 5498 80.91.229.12 (25 Aug 2010 06:44:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2010 06:44:40 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ich@frank-schmitt.net, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Aug 25 08:44:39 2010 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 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Oo9ix-00042S-3V for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2010 08:44:39 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39239 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Oo9dP-0008Jl-7E for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2010 02:38:55 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=51529 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Oo9dH-0008Jg-Ao for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2010 02:38:47 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Oo9dG-0000Zp-8O for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2010 02:38:47 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]:55231) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Oo9dG-0000Zk-1L for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2010 02:38:46 -0400 Original-Received: from eliz by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Oo9dD-0005MB-VI; Wed, 25 Aug 2010 02:38:44 -0400 In-reply-to: <87fwy35n11.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> (stephen@xemacs.org) 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:129191 Archived-At: > From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" > Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2010 13:33:46 +0900 > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > > Frank Schmitt writes: > > > I don't think this is fair. Mercurial, which seems to be one of the > > two top DVCS at the moment, has great Windows support. > > Python's transition to Mercurial is blocked on Windows support, and > only that. How do you claim that as "great" support? This seems to be about the EOL conversion issue? If so, I can hardly see how that could be used to rebuff the claim of "great Windows support": EOL conversion by a VCS is one of the greater evils of all times, in my book. I was so happy to hear that bzr doesn't by default. You don't want even to begin learning how much trouble that conversion caused me when we used CVS. I don't use Mercurial except to clone an occasional repository, so I really have no idea whether its support of Windows is "great". But it sounds extreme to me to say that EOL conversion (which AFAIU is already solved in latest hg) is evidence that this support is not good enough. Anyway, the EOL conversion doesn't seem to be relevant to Emacs, which happily supports Unix EOLs. I have no idea why EOL conversion support was so important to Python developers, but that's their funeral.