From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: John Wiegley Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel,gmane.emacs.orgmode Subject: Re: Sync up the org in emacs master to org maint branch? Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2017 20:54:39 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87k29d7zvw.fsf@engster.org> <87fuk08i01.fsf@engster.org> <87d1f36xnc.fsf@engster.org> <87a8a4ees0.fsf@engster.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1486087456 28906 195.159.176.226 (3 Feb 2017 02:04:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2017 02:04:16 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.130016 (Ma Gnus v0.16) Emacs/25.1.91 (darwin) Cc: Bastien Guerry , Emacs developers , emacs-org list , Phillip Lord , Kaushal Modi To: David Engster Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Feb 03 03:04:12 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cZTER-0007Jz-9P for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 03 Feb 2017 03:04:11 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:59793 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cZTEW-0005Zi-Uv for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 02 Feb 2017 21:04:16 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36966) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cZTCL-00047f-4v for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Feb 2017 21:02:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cZTCK-0008JY-2r for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Feb 2017 21:02:01 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-qt0-x244.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::244]:34335) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cZTCH-0008J1-8S; Thu, 02 Feb 2017 21:01:57 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-qt0-x244.google.com with SMTP id w20so1501383qtb.1; Thu, 02 Feb 2017 18:01:57 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:date:message-id:references :user-agent:mail-followup-to:mime-version; bh=kCaBJM4FQQGdO0YQbQyjyGjIF0uU/8BITZYCi3WqEZA=; b=RQeZKOJ/iEzQw1sblGl+QGjZ5OK/vjZhIBlHe+EMpR9sjwpS0yudHGGpzN4+J10WYm S6JQUQCygeQJDumFzmUVZLXCuQvP0XwNbfl28dhzGQlWGZbvt8uGd9tw3MIBqn7nYnyI v+Nk3SszSKunPpO4Ra/zZ6cuulUeVgfW9LnUcbltqO/eCEp4YpjP1oRL/jsZNJa3kAJv C5x5K51M+tjzHcSa+WoNlsDvVJYEqA1mVKn5Pjb7yNxC/s4A6XEd34IDGMyAgjScYsP7 40ZCEfPZmrh6m05athBddc9Ic3XG7UfxQ0UWshQ5DTEvlH0G+Y9AL3WtDmVjXdaRZW9M jk8Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:date:message-id :references:user-agent:mail-followup-to:mime-version; bh=kCaBJM4FQQGdO0YQbQyjyGjIF0uU/8BITZYCi3WqEZA=; b=FD+Puc8S0VyeB1V7gBZegvqJXFdyV37ljjELHaUKzNBmBL97zkVbQL7h33kZOJJntj MR/x6cIjedqWHHvDC1rZdixYN4c7QWPOd76WyJpZ0ttUpvek2QhUj/xighZT9yzUHQqI pux8weqfYLDY4iAtQhOcmVafrScwlZOz9cyeq50vU4MjigaoRbXNvCHvyCQ9vVgSIIko DSTZG9PAV97MqVFETOYrm5h8J7sWYTcZ13DHr+vNV0ec/jiNqs5N68bAaIC6OFmOnTYL n8ktaMiz+VZELokpuviCr/t+cvMIZkfnFKJh0DnOkjGDbKJU6RBB1Y8qzHeOffDef235 LM2g== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39lV2n1w7WWxCHtBcXjii07N7XBBAQUrikHloTyLc85GdbLgJ6N+zn4Bw7B1hBtxoA== X-Received: by 10.55.153.2 with SMTP id b2mr11103333qke.314.1486087316543; Thu, 02 Feb 2017 18:01:56 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from Hermes.local (125.sub-174-192-22.myvzw.com. [174.192.22.125]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 34sm23147419qtx.16.2017.02.02.18.01.53 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Thu, 02 Feb 2017 18:01:53 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Original-From: "John Wiegley" Original-Received: by Hermes.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id D51508B15D6; Thu, 2 Feb 2017 21:01:51 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <87a8a4ees0.fsf@engster.org> (David Engster's message of "Thu, 02 Feb 2017 17:30:39 +0100") Mail-Followup-To: David Engster , Kaushal Modi , Bastien Guerry , Emacs developers , emacs-org list , Phillip Lord X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::244 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:211905 gmane.emacs.orgmode:111882 Archived-At: >>>>> "DE" == David Engster writes: DE> So if you don't get convinced, we'll just move again, right? No big deal. I suppose I'm asking that of you, yes. DE> You are insinuating that my motivation is to delegate CEDET development to DE> the core Emacs developers. This is simply not true, and I don't see how my DE> original mail could be interpreted like that. I didn't mean to insinuate anything; it seems we may have gotten off on the wrong foot, my intention is to make your life easier, not harder. If all this would do is make more work for people, it's not worth it. DE> So let me try again: What I find completely misguided is to move packages DE> out of core *but still putting them into the release*. In other words, in DE> my opinion there are really just two options that make sense: you either DE> keep a package in core, or you kick it out and don't ship it with the DE> release. Why is this so? Right now I see the Emacs release as more than just releasing Emacs core; it's more of a "batteries included" release, combining the editor with lots of other default packages. It makes sense to me to move these batteries outside the core repository, than to put them all together in the same Git repository. We can arrange things so that a Git clone of Emacs includes pulling the submodules (or trees, or ELPA.git, or what not) that are considered part of "main Emacs development", including some of those batteries. I see this all as a process issue, and that "living in one Git repository" has just been an implementation strategy to satisfy that process. Why do the split at all? Core becomes smaller, its future history less cluttered, updating packages within it is no longer a major issue, and (I hope) it will be clearer when something is a core issue vs. a package issue. Also, people wanting to contribute new code to Emacs will not feel we're consigning them to disuse by saying it will go in ELPA. I've seen a few arguments already for things going into core, just to ensure more people would use it. DE> Say the Python developers would decide: Hey, many people like Django, so DE> let's just put their latest git master into our release and ship it. Would DE> you think that is a good approach? Some companies have actually done this. I remember when ActivePython bundled quite a few things, making it an attractive alternate to installing core Python (back when package management was still very poor in Python world). -- John Wiegley GPG fingerprint = 4710 CF98 AF9B 327B B80F http://newartisans.com 60E1 46C4 BD1A 7AC1 4BA2