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: Merging emacs-23 into trunk Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 04:11:06 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87bp5xg2b2.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87wrokegq0.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87k4kkdzkm.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1289466695 6989 80.91.229.12 (11 Nov 2010 09:11:35 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 09:11:35 +0000 (UTC) Cc: monnier@IRO.UMontreal.CA, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Nov 11 10:11:31 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 1PGTBq-0002VB-IE for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 10:11:31 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59448 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PGTBn-00013w-SJ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 04:11:27 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=33066 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PGTBb-00011f-70 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 04:11:16 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PGTBW-0003dI-1p for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 04:11:15 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]:40532) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PGTBV-0003d9-R8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 04:11:09 -0500 Original-Received: from eliz by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PGTBS-0000ei-IQ; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 04:11:06 -0500 In-reply-to: <87k4kkdzkm.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> (stephen@xemacs.org) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.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:132543 Archived-At: > From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" > Cc: monnier@IRO.UMontreal.CA, > emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 17:39:05 +0900 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > > If committing configure alone is all we need to avoid the problem, we > > could decide to do that, philosophical and atom-splitting issues > > notwithstanding. > > No, I'm saying that the design of bzr doesn't permit that. ??? Which part of design of bzr won't permit me doing the following? bzr ci configure.in ChangeLog bzr ci configure > As long as the Makefile knows to update configure, you're OK until > somebody with a different version of autoconf reports a bug. Or > somebody with *no* autoconf decides to build, and gets stopped before > they get started even though they've got a perfectly good configure. The issue of whether to have configure in the repository is a separate one. If the decision is not to track it, then, of course, all of the above is not relevant.