From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Bidi support Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 23:39:02 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87praszybe.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <838whgik6y.fsf@gnu.org> <8363cjipz6.fsf@gnu.org> <833a7khp7o.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1250912383 3633 80.91.229.12 (22 Aug 2009 03:39:43 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2009 03:39:43 +0000 (UTC) Cc: cyd@stupidchicken.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Aug 22 05:39:36 2009 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 1MehS3-000065-LQ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 22 Aug 2009 05:39:35 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38812 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MehS3-0004UR-Cy for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 21 Aug 2009 23:39:35 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MehRy-0004SY-8F for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Aug 2009 23:39:30 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MehRr-0004QZ-Pp for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Aug 2009 23:39:28 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=42057 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MehRr-0004QW-NB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Aug 2009 23:39:23 -0400 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.pppoe.ca ([206.248.154.182]:8552 helo=ironport2-out.teksavvy.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MehRp-0007DV-4g; Fri, 21 Aug 2009 23:39:21 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AqgEAKsFj0pFxIHU/2dsb2JhbACBU9MzhBoFh1Y X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.44,254,1249272000"; d="scan'208";a="43952268" Original-Received: from 69-196-129-212.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO ceviche.home) ([69.196.129.212]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with ESMTP; 21 Aug 2009 23:38:20 -0400 Original-Received: by ceviche.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 6308CB40E4; Fri, 21 Aug 2009 23:39:02 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <833a7khp7o.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Fri, 21 Aug 2009 23:44:11 +0300") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. 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:114502 Archived-At: > I already did. I have a source tree where the bidi code is merged > with the current trunk, and I merge them as needed all the time. Good, thank you. >> Agreed. The more I think about it, the more I think we need to open >> a new branch for "what will become emacs-24". Kind of like what we did >> with the emacs-unicode branch. I think bidi should be one of the first >> features to install on that branch. > Why not the other way around: make a branch for Emacs 23.x, and leave > Emacs 24 on the trunk? I think Yidong suggested that, and I think > it's a better idea. Sure. I tend to forget about CVS's idea that one of the branches is deemed special. So yes, "open a new branch for emacw-24" here would mean "create a new CVS branch for Emacs-23.2 and use the trunk for Emacs-24". [ I'm eagerly waiting to switch over to a system where branches are easier to use. ] > We never left the mainline of our development on a branch before. Actually we did for emacs-unicode ;-) Not that it matters, tho. >> I think it will stay unstable for too long, so it's not good enough for >> the current trunk (which I'd like to keep for shorter-term changes). > I guess that's a NO, but please note that this code, however unstable, > is never executed unless the user flips a variable. So I don't see > how it can destabilize the default configuration by being > dead ballast. I know, but somehow having such experimental code there makes me uneasy. Stefan