Source code, git and cvs

Source code, git and cvs

[uzibalqa]

What is the difference between 

git clone https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/emacs.git

and

git clone -b master git://git.sv.gnu.org/emacs.git

And what is this exactly

cvs -z3 -d:pserver:anonymous@cvs.savannah.gnu.org: 
 /sources/emacs co emacs

Re: Source code, git and cvs

[Po Lu]

uzibalqa <uzibalqa@proton.me> writes:

> What is the difference between 
>
> git clone https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/emacs.git
>
> and
>
> git clone -b master git://git.sv.gnu.org/emacs.git

The first command checks out the master branch of the Emacs repository
over the HTTP protocol, while the other does so over the Git protocol.

git.sv.gnu.org/emacs.git means exactly the same as
git.savannah.gnu.org/git/emacs.git; it is simply a more concise version
of the other repository path.

The difference between the two paths is of no relevance to prospective
Emacs developers.  All of this is spelt out clearly in CONTRIBUTE and
countless other documents, such as the manual pages for `git clone'.

> And what is this exactly
>
> cvs -z3 -d:pserver:anonymous@cvs.savannah.gnu.org: 
>  /sources/emacs co emacs

This is an obsolete method of obtaining a checkout of the in-development
Emacs source code.

Re: Source code, git and cvs

[uzibalqa]

------- Original Message -------
On Friday, July 21st, 2023 at 1:38 AM, Po Lu <luangruo@yahoo.com> wrote:


> uzibalqa uzibalqa@proton.me writes:
> 
> > What is the difference between
> > 
> > git clone https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/emacs.git
> > 
> > and
> > 
> > git clone -b master git://git.sv.gnu.org/emacs.git
> 
> 
> The first command checks out the master branch of the Emacs repository
> over the HTTP protocol, while the other does so over the Git protocol.
> 
> git.sv.gnu.org/emacs.git means exactly the same as
> git.savannah.gnu.org/git/emacs.git; it is simply a more concise version
> of the other repository path.
> 
> The difference between the two paths is of no relevance to prospective
> Emacs developers. All of this is spelt out clearly in CONTRIBUTE and
> countless other documents, such as the manual pages for `git clone'.
> 
> > And what is this exactly
> > 
> > cvs -z3 -d:pserver:anonymous@cvs.savannah.gnu.org:
> > /sources/emacs co emacs
> 
> 
> This is an obsolete method of obtaining a checkout of the in-development
> Emacs source code.

I wonder why you have INSTALL and INSTALL.REPO

Because if one gets the emacs source, wouldn't they want to build using instructions
from INSTALL.REPO rather than from INSTALL ?

Re: Source code, git and cvs

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2023 13:58:25 +0000
> From: uzibalqa <uzibalqa@proton.me>
> Cc: uzibalqa via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor
>  <help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>
> 
> I wonder why you have INSTALL and INSTALL.REPO
> 
> Because if one gets the emacs source, wouldn't they want to build using instructions
> from INSTALL.REPO rather than from INSTALL ?

INSTALL is for building a release tarball.  INSTALL.REPO is for
building a clone of the repository.  They are different because some
files are present in the tarball, but not in the repository (they are
generated during the build from the repository).

Re: Source code, git and cvs

[uzibalqa]

------- Original Message -------
On Friday, July 21st, 2023 at 2:23 AM, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:


> > Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2023 13:58:25 +0000
> > From: uzibalqa uzibalqa@proton.me
> > Cc: uzibalqa via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor
> > help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> > 
> > I wonder why you have INSTALL and INSTALL.REPO
> > 
> > Because if one gets the emacs source, wouldn't they want to build using instructions
> > from INSTALL.REPO rather than from INSTALL ?
> 
> 
> INSTALL is for building a release tarball. INSTALL.REPO is for
> building a clone of the repository. They are different because some
> files are present in the tarball, but not in the repository (they are
> generated during the build from the repository).

Can this detail be included in README ?  Because currently README only  
describes INSTALL.

Re: Source code, git and cvs

[Robert Pluim]

>>>>> On Thu, 20 Jul 2023 15:09:44 +0000, uzibalqa <uzibalqa@proton.me> said:

    uzibalqa> ------- Original Message -------
    uzibalqa> On Friday, July 21st, 2023 at 2:23 AM, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:


    >> > Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2023 13:58:25 +0000
    >> > From: uzibalqa uzibalqa@proton.me
    >> > Cc: uzibalqa via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor
    >> > help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
    >> > 
    >> > I wonder why you have INSTALL and INSTALL.REPO
    >> > 
    >> > Because if one gets the emacs source, wouldn't they want to build using instructions
    >> > from INSTALL.REPO rather than from INSTALL ?
    >> 
    >> 
    >> INSTALL is for building a release tarball. INSTALL.REPO is for
    >> building a clone of the repository. They are different because some
    >> files are present in the tarball, but not in the repository (they are
    >> generated during the build from the repository).

    uzibalqa> Can this detail be included in README ?  Because currently README only  
    uzibalqa> describes INSTALL. 

If you can read README, you can read INSTALL, which says, on line 11:

    For information about building from a Git checkout (rather than an
    Emacs release), read the INSTALL.REPO file first.

Robert
-- 

Re: Source code, git and cvs

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2023 15:09:44 +0000
> From: uzibalqa <uzibalqa@proton.me>
> Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> 
> > INSTALL is for building a release tarball. INSTALL.REPO is for
> > building a clone of the repository. They are different because some
> > files are present in the tarball, but not in the repository (they are
> > generated during the build from the repository).
> 
> Can this detail be included in README ?  Because currently README only  
> describes INSTALL. 

INSTALL itself already includes that information:

  For information about building from a Git checkout (rather than an
  Emacs release), read the INSTALL.REPO file first.

Re: Source code, git and cvs

[uzibalqa]

------- Original Message -------
On Friday, July 21st, 2023 at 3:36 AM, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:


> > Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2023 15:09:44 +0000
> > From: uzibalqa uzibalqa@proton.me
> > Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> > 
> > > INSTALL is for building a release tarball. INSTALL.REPO is for
> > > building a clone of the repository. They are different because some
> > > files are present in the tarball, but not in the repository (they are
> > > generated during the build from the repository).
> > 
> > Can this detail be included in README ? Because currently README only
> > describes INSTALL.
> 
> 
> INSTALL itself already includes that information:
> 
> For information about building from a Git checkout (rather than an
> Emacs release), read the INSTALL.REPO file first.

I do not like the idea that information is stored deeper and deeper
in hierarchy.  They are two separate things and should be mentioned 
in the README.  Not having to read about where to find information 
about installing from the repo using the file intended to show how 
to install from the tarball.

Do not make it difficult for users to get to the basic information 
they need.

README should describe both immediately at the start.  Not just about
installing from the tarball.

Re: Source code, git and cvs

[uzibalqa]

Sent with Proton Mail secure email.

------- Original Message -------
On Friday, July 21st, 2023 at 3:36 AM, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:


> > Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2023 15:09:44 +0000
> > From: uzibalqa uzibalqa@proton.me
> > Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> > 
> > > INSTALL is for building a release tarball. INSTALL.REPO is for
> > > building a clone of the repository. They are different because some
> > > files are present in the tarball, but not in the repository (they are
> > > generated during the build from the repository).
> > 
> > Can this detail be included in README ? Because currently README only
> > describes INSTALL.
> 
> 
> INSTALL itself already includes that information:
> 
> For information about building from a Git checkout (rather than an
> Emacs release), read the INSTALL.REPO file first.

The README says

"The file INSTALL in this directory says how to build and install GNU
Emacs on various systems, once you have unpacked or checked out the
entire Emacs file tree."

The above is incomplete and users are given just one aspect.

Instead README should explain that there are two installation mechanisms,
using a "Release Tarball" or using a "Snapshot Repository".

The file INSTALL describes how to build and install emacs from a tarball, whilst INSTALL-REPO
explains how to build and install using a repository. 

Easy, to the point, and the information is provided instantly.

Re: Source code, git and cvs

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2023 15:47:32 +0000
> From: uzibalqa <uzibalqa@proton.me>
> Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> 
> ------- Original Message -------
> On Friday, July 21st, 2023 at 3:36 AM, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> > > Can this detail be included in README ? Because currently README only
> > > describes INSTALL.
> > 
> > 
> > INSTALL itself already includes that information:
> > 
> > For information about building from a Git checkout (rather than an
> > Emacs release), read the INSTALL.REPO file first.
> 
> I do not like the idea that information is stored deeper and deeper
> in hierarchy.  They are two separate things and should be mentioned 
> in the README.  Not having to read about where to find information 
> about installing from the repo using the file intended to show how 
> to install from the tarball.
> 
> Do not make it difficult for users to get to the basic information 
> they need.

I think it makes it easier, because INSTALL is a definitely a file
people who want to install will read, whereas README is a more
general-purpose file which doesn't necessarily need to say anything
about installation.

> README should describe both immediately at the start.  Not just about
> installing from the tarball.

We clearly disagree.

Re: Source code, git and cvs

[uzibalqa]

------- Original Message -------
On Friday, July 21st, 2023 at 4:35 AM, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:


> > Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2023 15:47:32 +0000
> > From: uzibalqa uzibalqa@proton.me
> > Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> > 
> > ------- Original Message -------
> > On Friday, July 21st, 2023 at 3:36 AM, Eli Zaretskii eliz@gnu.org wrote:
> > 
> > > > Can this detail be included in README ? Because currently README only
> > > > describes INSTALL.
> > > 
> > > INSTALL itself already includes that information:
> > > 
> > > For information about building from a Git checkout (rather than an
> > > Emacs release), read the INSTALL.REPO file first.
> > 
> > I do not like the idea that information is stored deeper and deeper
> > in hierarchy. They are two separate things and should be mentioned
> > in the README. Not having to read about where to find information
> > about installing from the repo using the file intended to show how
> > to install from the tarball.
> > 
> > Do not make it difficult for users to get to the basic information
> > they need.
> 
> 
> I think it makes it easier, because INSTALL is a definitely a file
> people who want to install will read, whereas README is a more
> general-purpose file which doesn't necessarily need to say anything
> about installation.
> 
> > README should describe both immediately at the start. Not just about
> > installing from the tarball.
> 
> 
> We clearly disagree.

Of course, hide it and make things more difficult for new users.   And then 
expect them to figure out things by themselves.   And when they ask questions,
never be straightforward and give them the code they need to use.  It is their
job to go through the ever increasing obfuscation of information embedded within
deeper and deeper levels of cyclomatic complexity.  Classic example of development 
malpractice.

  
smart approach.

Re: Source code, git and cvs

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2023 17:33:41 +0000
> From: uzibalqa <uzibalqa@proton.me>
> Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> 
> > > README should describe both immediately at the start. Not just about
> > > installing from the tarball.
> > 
> > 
> > We clearly disagree.
> 
> Of course, hide it and make things more difficult for new users.   And then 
> expect them to figure out things by themselves.   And when they ask questions,
> never be straightforward and give them the code they need to use.  It is their
> job to go through the ever increasing obfuscation of information embedded within
> deeper and deeper levels of cyclomatic complexity.  Classic example of development 
> malpractice.

You should stop your arrogant and rude remarks about project practices
that you just learned yesterday.  It is not wise, to say the least, to
show your ignorance by claiming you are right even after you have been
pointed to your mistakes and stuff you missed in the docs.

The README, INSTALL, etc. files in the top-level directory are the
result of many years of experience and many users contributing to
them, they are not just random text that was written yesterday and
therefore needs to be polished.  It's already polished, so any change
you suggest based on 5 sec of thought is more than likely to have
downsides that were already considered and rejected in the long
history of Emacs development.

You have ample opportunity to exercise some humility and learn (and
you have a lot to learn, believe me) before you get to the position
where you might "know better", and have the moral right to teach us
what is "malpractice".  Suggest to use that opportunity.

Re: Source code, git and cvs

[uzibalqa]

------- Original Message -------
On Friday, July 21st, 2023 at 6:31 AM, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:


> > Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2023 17:33:41 +0000
> > From: uzibalqa uzibalqa@proton.me
> > Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> > 
> > > > README should describe both immediately at the start. Not just about
> > > > installing from the tarball.
> > > 
> > > We clearly disagree.
> > 
> > Of course, hide it and make things more difficult for new users. And then
> > expect them to figure out things by themselves. And when they ask questions,
> > never be straightforward and give them the code they need to use. It is their
> > job to go through the ever increasing obfuscation of information embedded within
> > deeper and deeper levels of cyclomatic complexity. Classic example of development
> > malpractice.
> 
> 
> You should stop your arrogant and rude remarks about project practices
> that you just learned yesterday. It is not wise, to say the least, to
> show your ignorance by claiming you are right even after you have been
> pointed to your mistakes and stuff you missed in the docs.

Yes, I am right, you are wrong.
 
> The README, INSTALL, etc. files in the top-level directory are the
> result of many years of experience and many users contributing to
> them, they are not just random text that was written yesterday and
> therefore needs to be polished. It's already polished, so any change
> you suggest based on 5 sec of thought is more than likely to have
> downsides that were already considered and rejected in the long
> history of Emacs development.

Typical nonsense.
 
> You have ample opportunity to exercise some humility and learn (and
> you have a lot to learn, believe me) before you get to the position
> where you might "know better", and have the moral right to teach us
> what is "malpractice". Suggest to use that opportunity.

I just look at things how they are, so one can effortlessly navigate
through the material.  There is no need to be humble and I definitely
have the autonomy to take action without approval or authority.  I am
certainly not bound by any requirement of external validation or permission
to do so.

Re: Source code, git and cvs

[uzibalqa]

Sent with Proton Mail secure email.

------- Original Message -------
On Friday, July 21st, 2023 at 7:12 AM, uzibalqa <uzibalqa@proton.me> wrote:


> 
> ------- Original Message -------
> On Friday, July 21st, 2023 at 6:31 AM, Eli Zaretskii eliz@gnu.org wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> > > Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2023 17:33:41 +0000
> > > From: uzibalqa uzibalqa@proton.me
> > > Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> > > 
> > > > > README should describe both immediately at the start. Not just about
> > > > > installing from the tarball.
> > > > 
> > > > We clearly disagree.
> > > 
> > > Of course, hide it and make things more difficult for new users. And then
> > > expect them to figure out things by themselves. And when they ask questions,
> > > never be straightforward and give them the code they need to use. It is their
> > > job to go through the ever increasing obfuscation of information embedded within
> > > deeper and deeper levels of cyclomatic complexity. Classic example of development
> > > malpractice.
> > 
> > You should stop your arrogant and rude remarks about project practices
> > that you just learned yesterday. It is not wise, to say the least, to
> > show your ignorance by claiming you are right even after you have been
> > pointed to your mistakes and stuff you missed in the docs.
> 
> 
> Yes, I am right, you are wrong.
> 
> > The README, INSTALL, etc. files in the top-level directory are the
> > result of many years of experience and many users contributing to
> > them, they are not just random text that was written yesterday and
> > therefore needs to be polished. It's already polished, so any change
> > you suggest based on 5 sec of thought is more than likely to have
> > downsides that were already considered and rejected in the long
> > history of Emacs development.
> 
> 
> Typical nonsense.
> 
> > You have ample opportunity to exercise some humility and learn (and
> > you have a lot to learn, believe me) before you get to the position
> > where you might "know better", and have the moral right to teach us
> > what is "malpractice". Suggest to use that opportunity.
> 
> 
> I just look at things how they are, so one can effortlessly navigate
> through the material. There is no need to be humble and I definitely
> have the autonomy to take action without approval or authority. I am
> certainly not bound by any requirement of external validation or permission
> to do so.

At one time you stated that one of the gravest problems you see for the future 
of Emacs development is that we slowly but steadily lose old-timers who know a 
lot about the Emacs  internals ... If this tendency continues, we will soon lose 
the ability to make deep infrastructure changes.

Yet you continue to refuse spending effort on making sure that future developers 
will be able to learn quickly.  But the direction I usually get is to work hard.  
The reality is that hard working people fail.  We complain about everything in life
because we're doing everything hard.  Once your intelligence has turned against you,
there is no power in universe that can save you, that's all.

The solution is not about adding more and more stuff but having a compact enough 
commentary that people would be willing to spend reasonable time on compared to 
the time taken to complete some task.  If that takes too long or requires too much
jumping around, the project is history.  Worked with companies like that, they are 
all gone.

Re: Source code, git and cvs

[tomas]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 905 bytes --]

On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 07:12:21PM +0000, uzibalqa wrote:
> 
> 
> ------- Original Message -------
> On Friday, July 21st, 2023 at 6:31 AM, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> > > Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2023 17:33:41 +0000
> > > From: uzibalqa uzibalqa@proton.me

[...]

> Yes, I am right, you are wrong.

Given the level of experience of you both, I guess that no,
Eli is most probably right and you, uzibalqa, are wrong. At
least in the current context.

Yes, I know that was meant as sarcasm, but ironically, it
does highlight the problem at hand and why, I, at least, have
decided to reduce my interactions with you as much as possible.

I'm not trying to change your ways, only you can, and experience
here shows that you aren't willing or able to. It's not my
prerogative to judge that.

I only come forward because I see Eli being unfairly attacked.

Cheers
-- 
t

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

Re: Source code, git and cvs

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2023 20:10:56 +0000
> From: uzibalqa <uzibalqa@proton.me>
> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> 
> Yet you continue to refuse spending effort on making sure that future developers 
> will be able to learn quickly.

You can write whatever you like: paper won't blush.  But nothing is
farther from the truth, and if someone wants to have an independent
opinion, they should just look at my commit trail.

Re: Source code, git and cvs

[Po Lu]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2023 20:10:56 +0000
>> From: uzibalqa <uzibalqa@proton.me>
>> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
>> 
>> Yet you continue to refuse spending effort on making sure that future developers 
>> will be able to learn quickly.
>
> You can write whatever you like: paper won't blush.  But nothing is
> farther from the truth, and if someone wants to have an independent
> opinion, they should just look at my commit trail.

fatiparty, uzibalqa, emacsq, goncholden, Christopher Dimech, whoever you
are:

From March 2022 onwards, you have been sporadically posting to this list
under various identities, seeking help with problems rising from
incomplete or incorrect understandings of Emacs documentation, or
unreasonable expectations thereof.  Each time an Emacs developer tries
to assist you, or points out the pertinent documentation, you find a
contrived fault with that documentation or the behavior of said Emacs
developer.  Name-calling promptly follows, mostly from you.

Multiple individuals have already castigated you for this behavior,
whatever the reason for it may be.  Continuing to interact this way
would be to your detriment, assuming that you want to continue receiving
help from the readers of this list (which is doubtful.)

Re: Source code, git and cvs

[uzibalqa]

------- Original Message -------
On Friday, July 21st, 2023 at 4:27 PM, tomas@tuxteam.de <tomas@tuxteam.de> wrote:


> On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 07:12:21PM +0000, uzibalqa wrote:
> 
> > ------- Original Message -------
> > On Friday, July 21st, 2023 at 6:31 AM, Eli Zaretskii eliz@gnu.org wrote:
> > 
> > > > Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2023 17:33:41 +0000
> > > > From: uzibalqa uzibalqa@proton.me
> 
> 
> [...]
> 
> > Yes, I am right, you are wrong.
> 
> 
> Given the level of experience of you both, I guess that no,
> Eli is most probably right and you, uzibalqa, are wrong. At
> least in the current context.

You don't know about my experience.
 
> Yes, I know that was meant as sarcasm, but ironically, it
> does highlight the problem at hand and why, I, at least, have
> decided to reduce my interactions with you as much as possible.
> 
> I'm not trying to change your ways, only you can, and experience
> here shows that you aren't willing or able to. It's not my
> prerogative to judge that.

What I have seen is that commonly, the difficulties of users telling you this
is commonly undervalued.  And then times go by and people start to understand.  
 
The claim I get that everything is properly done is a serious fallacy.  There
should be a version of emacs where do not continually add to it, but only to get
to a point  where things are well designed and capable of being handle well by
other programmers.  Eli is getting in a difficult position, because the next poor
sod is going to suffer much more or give up keep the whole thing together.

> I only come forward because I see Eli being unfairly attacked.

Yes Stockton, because the message is that everything is fine as it is !
 
> Cheers
> --
> t

Re: Source code, git and cvs

[uzibalqa]

------- Original Message -------
On Friday, July 21st, 2023 at 6:12 PM, Po Lu <luangruo@yahoo.com> wrote:


> Eli Zaretskii eliz@gnu.org writes:
> 
> > > Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2023 20:10:56 +0000
> > > From: uzibalqa uzibalqa@proton.me
> > > Cc: Eli Zaretskii eliz@gnu.org, help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> > > 
> > > Yet you continue to refuse spending effort on making sure that future developers
> > > will be able to learn quickly.
> > 
> > You can write whatever you like: paper won't blush. But nothing is
> > farther from the truth, and if someone wants to have an independent
> > opinion, they should just look at my commit trail.
> 
> 
> fatiparty, uzibalqa, emacsq, goncholden, Christopher Dimech, whoever you
> are:
> 
> From March 2022 onwards, you have been sporadically posting to this list
> under various identities, seeking help with problems rising from
> incomplete or incorrect understandings of Emacs documentation, or
> unreasonable expectations thereof. Each time an Emacs developer tries
> to assist you, or points out the pertinent documentation, you find a
> contrived fault with that documentation or the behavior of said Emacs
> developer. Name-calling promptly follows, mostly from you.

Yes, because things are not as good as many believe they are.  It is only
a belief.  And then we start again with the usual confidence friends declaring 
how my expectations are unreasonable.  If I work on something, will they get 
accepted ? Hell no ! So then one wonders about some behavior.
 
> Multiple individuals have already castigated you for this behavior,
> whatever the reason for it may be. Continuing to interact this way
> would be to your detriment, assuming that you want to continue receiving
> help from the readers of this list (which is doubtful.)

Re: Source code, git and cvs

[uzibalqa]

------- Original Message -------
On Friday, July 21st, 2023 at 10:43 PM, uzibalqa <uzibalqa@proton.me> wrote:


> ------- Original Message -------
> On Friday, July 21st, 2023 at 6:12 PM, Po Lu luangruo@yahoo.com wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> > Eli Zaretskii eliz@gnu.org writes:
> > 
> > > > Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2023 20:10:56 +0000
> > > > From: uzibalqa uzibalqa@proton.me
> > > > Cc: Eli Zaretskii eliz@gnu.org, help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> > > > 
> > > > Yet you continue to refuse spending effort on making sure that future developers
> > > > will be able to learn quickly.
> > > 
> > > You can write whatever you like: paper won't blush. But nothing is
> > > farther from the truth, and if someone wants to have an independent
> > > opinion, they should just look at my commit trail.
> > 
> > fatiparty, uzibalqa, emacsq, goncholden, Christopher Dimech, whoever you
> > are:

It seems there are many people you don't like.
 
> > From March 2022 onwards, you have been sporadically posting to this list
> > under various identities, seeking help with problems rising from
> > incomplete or incorrect understandings of Emacs documentation, or
> > unreasonable expectations thereof. Each time an Emacs developer tries
> > to assist you, or points out the pertinent documentation, you find a
> > contrived fault with that documentation or the behavior of said Emacs
> > developer. Name-calling promptly follows, mostly from you.
> 
> 
> Yes, because things are not as good as many believe they are. It is only
> a belief. And then we start again with the usual confidence friends declaring
> how my expectations are unreasonable. If I work on something, will they get
> accepted ? Hell no ! So then one wonders about some behavior.
> 
> > Multiple individuals have already castigated you for this behavior,
> > whatever the reason for it may be. Continuing to interact this way
> > would be to your detriment, assuming that you want to continue receiving
> > help from the readers of this list (which is doubtful.)

Re: Source code, git and cvs

[uzibalqa]

------- Original Message -------
On Friday, July 21st, 2023 at 6:12 PM, Po Lu <luangruo@yahoo.com> wrote:


> Eli Zaretskii eliz@gnu.org writes:
> 
> > > Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2023 20:10:56 +0000
> > > From: uzibalqa uzibalqa@proton.me
> > > Cc: Eli Zaretskii eliz@gnu.org, help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> > > 
> > > Yet you continue to refuse spending effort on making sure that future developers
> > > will be able to learn quickly.
> > 
> > You can write whatever you like: paper won't blush. But nothing is
> > farther from the truth, and if someone wants to have an independent
> > opinion, they should just look at my commit trail.
> 
> 
> fatiparty, uzibalqa, emacsq, goncholden, Christopher Dimech, whoever you
> are:
> 
> From March 2022 onwards, you have been sporadically posting to this list
> under various identities, seeking help with problems rising from
> incomplete or incorrect understandings of Emacs documentation, or
> unreasonable expectations thereof. Each time an Emacs developer tries
> to assist you, or points out the pertinent documentation, you find a
> contrived fault with that documentation or the behavior of said Emacs
> developer. Name-calling promptly follows, mostly from you.
> 
> Multiple individuals have already castigated you for this behavior,
> whatever the reason for it may be. Continuing to interact this way
> would be to your detriment, assuming that you want to continue receiving
> help from the readers of this list (which is doubtful.)

Explain to me the benefit of having Cyclomatic Complexity in the documentation ?
If you had a program to handle, perhaps there is a good point - still, try to 
get a human to understand an xml structure, will it be pleasant I ask.

But you are forcing a human being (a user for that matter) to go through all the 
difficulties that often arise when dealing with nested or hierarchically placed
information.  

Such schemes constitute inefficient information retrieval or navigation.  Cannot see 
many to have enough sense to recognise this.

Re: Source code, git and cvs

[Po Lu]

uzibalqa <uzibalqa@proton.me> writes:

> The claim I get that everything is properly done is a serious fallacy.
> There should be a version of emacs where do not continually add to it,
> but only to get to a point where things are well designed and capable
> of being handle well by other programmers.  Eli is getting in a
> difficult position, because the next poor sod is going to suffer much
> more or give up keep the whole thing together.

From your perspective, everyone apart from yourself is an ``Emacs
developer'', engaged in a wayward conspiracy to prevent users from
understanding Emacs documentation.  You, a crusader fighting for the
rights of the oppressed masses of Emacs users, are being silenced by
companies of the King's men.

The situation you illustrate couldn't be further from the truth.

Perhaps you should contemplate why everyone on this list -- aside from
you and your other identities, of course -- finds your demands
unreasonable, and is satisfied with our current practices for writing
documentation.

Re: Source code, git and cvs

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2023 11:18:23 +0000
> From: uzibalqa <uzibalqa@proton.me>
> Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> 
> Explain to me the benefit of having Cyclomatic Complexity in the documentation ?
> If you had a program to handle, perhaps there is a good point - still, try to 
> get a human to understand an xml structure, will it be pleasant I ask.
> 
> But you are forcing a human being (a user for that matter) to go through all the 
> difficulties that often arise when dealing with nested or hierarchically placed
> information.  

The way we deal with this is by providing extensive indexing.  You
should learn to use the Info-index command (bound to 'i' inside Info)
much more.

Re: Source code, git and cvs

[uzibalqa]

------- Original Message -------
On Saturday, July 22nd, 2023 at 12:30 AM, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:


> > Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2023 11:18:23 +0000
> > From: uzibalqa uzibalqa@proton.me
> > Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> > 
> > Explain to me the benefit of having Cyclomatic Complexity in the documentation ?
> > If you had a program to handle, perhaps there is a good point - still, try to
> > get a human to understand an xml structure, will it be pleasant I ask.
> > 
> > But you are forcing a human being (a user for that matter) to go through all the
> > difficulties that often arise when dealing with nested or hierarchically placed
> > information.
> 
> 
> The way we deal with this is by providing extensive indexing. You
> should learn to use the Info-index command (bound to 'i' inside Info)
> much more.

I will check it out using menus as example.  Would you like me to report back?

Re: Source code, git and cvs

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2023 12:40:41 +0000
> From: uzibalqa <uzibalqa@proton.me>
> Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> 
> > The way we deal with this is by providing extensive indexing. You
> > should learn to use the Info-index command (bound to 'i' inside Info)
> > much more.
> 
> I will check it out using menus as example.  Would you like me to report back?

You (and others) are always welcome to report back.  Just don't expect
that every suggestion you come up with will be necessarily agreed to
and implemented.  I can promise you that they will be seriously
considered, though.

Re: Source code, git and cvs

[uzibalqa]

------- Original Message -------
On Saturday, July 22nd, 2023 at 12:12 AM, Po Lu <luangruo@yahoo.com> wrote:


> uzibalqa uzibalqa@proton.me writes:
> 
> > The claim I get that everything is properly done is a serious fallacy.
> > There should be a version of emacs where do not continually add to it,
> > but only to get to a point where things are well designed and capable
> > of being handle well by other programmers. Eli is getting in a
> > difficult position, because the next poor sod is going to suffer much
> > more or give up keep the whole thing together.
> 
> 
> From your perspective, everyone apart from yourself is an ``Emacs
> developer'', engaged in a wayward conspiracy to prevent users from
> understanding Emacs documentation. You, a crusader fighting for the
> rights of the oppressed masses of Emacs users, are being silenced by
> companies of the King's men.
> 
> The situation you illustrate couldn't be further from the truth.
> 
> Perhaps you should contemplate why everyone on this list -- aside from
> you and your other identities, of course -- finds your demands
> unreasonable, and is satisfied with our current practices for writing
> documentation.

Past the elisp basics, the language interaction with emacs is generally agreed  
to be difficult and vast, and you'll likely get lost in a sea of details.

That is accepted, and you are mistaking memory with intelligence.  An automated
tool would be able to do it better than you.  Otherwise the way the documentation 
is designed has to change.

RE: [External] : Re: Source code, git and cvs

[Drew Adams]

> An automated tool would be able to do it
> better than you.  Otherwise the way the
> documentation is designed has to change.

(Apologies to others for tossing a stick
on the dump fire...)

A whiner/kvetcher bot would be able to
do what you're doing here as well as you.
Maybe hone your Elisp skills by writing
one, then retire the man-child griping?

Only half-kidding.

RE: [External] : Re: Source code, git and cvs

[uzibalqa]

------- Original Message -------
On Saturday, July 22nd, 2023 at 2:20 AM, Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com> wrote:


> > An automated tool would be able to do it
> > better than you. Otherwise the way the
> > documentation is designed has to change.
> 
> 
> (Apologies to others for tossing a stick
> on the dump fire...)
> 
> A whiner/kvetcher bot would be able to
> do what you're doing here as well as you.
> Maybe hone your Elisp skills by writing
> one, then retire the man-child griping?
> 
> Only half-kidding.

Even Montgomery used to gripe.  But always gripe upwards towards the decision
makers.   It is a british snobbing idea that those griping should be treated 
like children.