From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Juanma Barranquero" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: MAINTAINERS file Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 01:59:27 +0100 Message-ID: References: <18375.18663.981150.252393@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <85hcfi28n2.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <47D18DBF.5020302@emf.net> <47D1F997.6030303@emf.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1204937986 32243 80.91.229.12 (8 Mar 2008 00:59:46 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 00:59:46 +0000 (UTC) Cc: eliz@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org, jeremy@jeremyms.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Thomas Lord" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Mar 08 02:00:13 2008 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 1JXnQ3-0001F5-TB for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:00:12 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JXnPW-0005kA-4x for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 07 Mar 2008 19:59:38 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JXnPQ-0005em-6e for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 07 Mar 2008 19:59:32 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JXnPN-0005Yn-7S for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 07 Mar 2008 19:59:31 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JXnPN-0005YY-2c for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 07 Mar 2008 19:59:29 -0500 Original-Received: from wx-out-0506.google.com ([66.249.82.238]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JXnPM-0005KZ-Pl for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 07 Mar 2008 19:59:28 -0500 Original-Received: by wx-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id s7so804226wxc.24 for ; Fri, 07 Mar 2008 16:59:28 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=h9UhZ+4How0y6a3QlDRG3hZXALXM4L7RXkl66DXIorI=; b=PKkoP+CKxwPt447rRLo3oX935Uceu4ZP1GqcrF43h2Io75cc/s3FjIE1m5nMIxMzl5YFSaDZrNDiBqd2kfCzwA430BDNUPR+vSey8L4w453blyO57VxhM3sreVV0q/BuhVPRC7+uPapKxxYOSmZxmljb0Q6DCVN+07gT9Eb3UcI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=T4OuU1LgofXMK70758uwyrNIl+tabxLappc6+fnNl618ZKlBK3mMjtUYxS1Huwz7mckEdysOQ7e4Y2OJ6+zC0+1KoCOWhB6JX6HzKQWF/E4Y+X1ax+rSXEzCeHSuI2WONvyNGguV/2voS6k3GfwzXvgNZRiWqGGIWjGVhwIBlKs= Original-Received: by 10.140.247.11 with SMTP id u11mr1262758rvh.23.1204937967544; Fri, 07 Mar 2008 16:59:27 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.114.166.20 with HTTP; Fri, 7 Mar 2008 16:59:27 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <47D1F997.6030303@emf.net> Content-Disposition: inline X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) 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:91683 Archived-At: On Sat, Mar 8, 2008 at 3:27 AM, Thomas Lord wrote: > Sure, and, mostly the same way: the boss(es) just pick one, > somewhat arbitrarily but perhaps with some intuition about > what will work out. Some have done just that, and some others did have discussions. I'm just pointing out that stopping to evaluate the alternatives is not dangerous per se. > In this case, ESR, bless his heart, seems to > have > prompted quite a few list members to go back and refresh their > perspective on dvcs and spout some observations and opinions. So, > RMS got a fair amount of input. I don't think so. Very few people has experience with several dVCS; most discussion (at least, in this list) has not gone over the level of "this is the dVCS I'm comfortable with". > I'm just trying to > point > out that that's not a crazy policy because, in calling for a different > approach to the decision, you're suggesting a (pretty radical) change > in policy. I don't think Richard's policies are crazy; I respect him and his accomplishments. But I'm don't think either that what I'm suggesting is a radical change in policy, unless "stop and look at the alternatives" is considered radical. Juanma