From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: MAINTAINERS file Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2008 17:43:39 +0200 Message-ID: References: <18375.18663.981150.252393@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <87od9wt19m.fsf@elegiac.orebokech.com> <87tzjnvjhc.fsf@red-bean.com> <87zlte3848.fsf@ambire.localdomain> <877igipc17.fsf@jbms.ath.cx> <87tzjmnsiz.fsf@jbms.ath.cx> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1204731949 24223 80.91.229.12 (5 Mar 2008 15:45:49 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 15:45:49 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Jeremy Maitin-Shepard Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 05 16:46:16 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 1JWvmz-0002Hf-E8 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 05 Mar 2008 16:44:17 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JWvmS-0001d1-4L for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 05 Mar 2008 10:43:44 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JWvmO-0001bY-5u for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 05 Mar 2008 10:43:40 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JWvmL-0001au-RU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 05 Mar 2008 10:43:38 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JWvmL-0001ar-MF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 05 Mar 2008 10:43:37 -0500 Original-Received: from romy.inter.net.il ([213.8.233.24]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JWvmL-0005Lm-8Q for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 05 Mar 2008 10:43:37 -0500 Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-84-229-223-39.inter.net.il [84.229.223.39]) by romy.inter.net.il (MOS 3.7.3-GA) with ESMTP id KLQ01029 (AUTH halo1); Wed, 5 Mar 2008 17:43:16 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: <87tzjmnsiz.fsf@jbms.ath.cx> (message from Jeremy Maitin-Shepard on Tue, 04 Mar 2008 15:28:04 -0500) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: FreeBSD 4.7-5.2 (or MacOS X 10.2-10.4) (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:91387 Archived-At: > From: Jeremy Maitin-Shepard > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, Juanma Barranquero , rms@gnu.org > Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2008 15:28:04 -0500 > > I'm not claiming that bzr is necessarily inferior; I don't know enough > about bzr to be sure. What I'm claiming is that it _might_ be inferior, > and it seems the decision to use it was based on largely on it being > In particular, it seems that the decision to use it was not based on > any actual experience in using bzr or any alternatives. Well, how about reading the discussions about this in the-not-so-distant past here. Then you can draw your conclusions.