From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Lars Ingebrigtsen 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 15:34:26 +0100 Message-ID: References: <87k29d7zvw.fsf@engster.org> <87fuk08i01.fsf@engster.org> <87d1f36xnc.fsf@engster.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1486046112 11166 195.159.176.226 (2 Feb 2017 14:35:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2017 14:35:12 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Bastien Guerry , Kaushal Modi , Phillip Lord , emacs-org list , Emacs developers To: David Engster Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Feb 02 15:34:59 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 1cZITS-0002OQ-OM for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 02 Feb 2017 15:34:58 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56974 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cZITX-0004tT-VG for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 02 Feb 2017 09:35:04 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35008) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cZITN-0004s5-RX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Feb 2017 09:34:54 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cZITM-00057A-Um for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Feb 2017 09:34:53 -0500 Original-Received: from hermes.netfonds.no ([80.91.224.195]:57240) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cZITG-000542-Kw; Thu, 02 Feb 2017 09:34:46 -0500 Original-Received: from cm-84.215.1.64.getinternet.no ([84.215.1.64] helo=stories) by hermes.netfonds.no with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cZISx-0003dX-Bn; Thu, 02 Feb 2017 15:34:35 +0100 Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwBAMAAAClLOS0AAAAElBMVEWNiobd3dxYRxdYUio2 HCVDMxd2ZuAMAAACZElEQVQ4jY2TvWLiMBCEdy3SS3HSO2urlzH0gKWeE9r3f5WbFVzu0p0KMP40 O/sHqXiZvayDzImDa9oWbXXbSOcgX77yu3AIgYtqU60zwBQG3Ax+CkYoRlURAVjDGOysZAo+SisA R2ocXsddwpjImUKhiB24nHE9eB+8ai4VoNDplO0E33UbzKuaueaslPwDFgSNVIW/masW9T7pFkzz uSBZNZC2c7zz6OOZwyn4MbaGWADnstPkxutp5oBoPmq8dZBLZhrpqtq9R8SXDkq+IEu/5r0Dj+Ju YDO1/AXTC5SwJhpFM9I3xZ34g+++NGYifpOYDzk/kNUjp8NOn82aDo1F2fO+0Xh36bPxlkKvw2/x QWQKn2b2DZlxYLQq8PBr8Hk2kNhp6RltbOBrcAZConAoj57rwT6G6ShnjBaPHxm12EmrTWAWiQDM AeldeyimZ4lxeSo68C/AAS1ZkJXNLZc1eLy8kkeAo8qCOibrXAZlH/arZT1IB9VmfkDLcfd0ZQhf QB/cSyYoPFvEIUqEx01t2qEPPHSnd5G6G9Bap54t3tqmABSAgtGXuj6n1EVYROtuBcAKXf7sYzjl thMKFMVOtltOGBO2AcXmRvwENZaaUaonJgML0ZsBOwCJPJE7ZNWFAu5JrA2iNk2E9+4t37SRq11h W9keDi4OS1N0J5sHqrH9bhLPUPTFT+4JxGwWrW5N67FhaNt8fIGodVGhRKkuAHj9AljWiL6486BL rnGYvwH6KRVmgj7g+y94xsN/0j6xi/+CGm37a3/+CarEGF8/foQyJ5Vv8i+QV6Qe6yeQ/wC/Adje rXsewpY5AAAAAElFTkSuQmCC In-Reply-To: (John Wiegley's message of "Thu, 02 Feb 2017 09:09:54 -0500") X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 80.91.224.195 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:211873 gmane.emacs.orgmode:111847 Archived-At: John Wiegley writes: > OK, to continue the analogy, what is the right answer? Technically it > doesn't seem as though Django belongs there, even if culturally it > sounds hard to separate. Should it stay indefinitely, or should the > development model change? If somebody genuinely offered to take over, say, rmail, and maintain it separately, and handle bug reports, and, like, be the maintainer, that would be a help. Great, go ahead, and put the resulting thing in ELPA. But nobody has made that offer? Or have they, and I just missed it? I fail to see how just shuffling rmail from Emacs to ELPA helps us in any way with the maintainership. Instead it creates an extra burden on us, since we (in addition to all the normal maintainership) will also have to consider Emacs version compatibility. -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no