[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Switching to bzr: what Emacs developers should know?
From: |
Bastien |
Subject: |
Re: Switching to bzr: what Emacs developers should know? |
Date: |
Sun, 09 Aug 2009 06:41:12 +0800 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux) |
Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> writes:
>>> Will the switch to bzr affect the way upstream packages like Gnus
>>> or Org are integrated in Emacs development?
>
> Of course. Gnus is the special one because it currently benefits from
> a very nice setup. For Org, I don't think it can get much worse.
That doesn't really tell how maintainance of Org will be affected by
switching to bzr.
Also, http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/BzrForEmacsDevs says:
(Note: it’s not clear whether we’re going to continue the habit of
keeping a separate ChangeLog file, now that we have a version control
system that supports atomic multi-target commits. We should figure
that out at some point.)
What's Emacs maintainers take on this?
FWIW, I think we shouldn't get rid of the ChangeLog because it doesn't
depend on the dVCS log format.
--
Bastien
- Switching to bzr: what Emacs developers should know?, Bastien, 2009/08/08
- bzr for Gnus (was: Switching to bzr: what Emacs developers should know?), Ted Zlatanov, 2009/08/11
- bzr for Gnus (was: Switching to bzr: what Emacs developers should know?), Stephen J. Turnbull, 2009/08/12
- Re: bzr for Gnus (was: Switching to bzr: what Emacs developers should know?), Mike Kupfer, 2009/08/12
- Re: bzr for Gnus, Ted Zlatanov, 2009/08/12
- Re: bzr for Gnus, Miles Bader, 2009/08/12