[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Elisp branch ready for merge (??)
From: |
Christopher Allan Webber |
Subject: |
Re: Elisp branch ready for merge (??) |
Date: |
Sat, 12 Mar 2016 09:15:58 -0800 |
User-agent: |
mu4e 0.9.13; emacs 24.5.1 |
Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer writes:
> Christopher Allan Webber <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer writes:
>>
>>> Christopher Allan Webber <address@hidden> writes:
>>>
>>>> Well, I didn't think I'd have time to do this (and in a sense I didn't)
>>>> but:
>>>> https://gitlab.com/dustyweb/guile/tree/merge-bipt-elisp-wip
>>>>
>>>> I've rebased the whole branch against git master and added ChangeLog
>>>> style entries. "make check" is passing. It seems to me that it's ready
>>>> for merge. I did the best I could on the ChangeLog additions, both with
>>>> my limited ChangeLog experience and from my limited Guile internals
>>>> experience. So, corrections welcome, but otherwise...
>>>
>>> Exciting!
>>>
>>> Small remark: the "title" line of the commit messages should be complete
>>> sentences.
>>
>> Yes, though I didn't write them. I also don't know in each case what a
>> complete sentence would be. I did my best job by filling in the
>> ChangeLog style part. Often times my figuring out the ChangeLog stuff
>> was based on some sentence fragment.
>>
>> Changing the one part that is the original author's writing to something
>> different... I can do it by attempting to guess, but I'm worried about
>> removing that context.
>>
>> One thing I could do is leave in the description: "Original title: foo"
>>
>> What do you think of that?
>
> In some cases it seems the title is already a sentence, just lacking
> capitalization and punctuation. (It seems Guile doesn't have a strict
> rule about the punctuation though.)
>
> In other cases it seems like titles that should be "Add foobar" are
> shortened to just "foobar", e.g.:
>
> - guile-backtrace function
> - eval-when
> - fset macro
> - defsubst
> - compiler macros
> - elisp @@ macro
>
> All in all it looks like most titles should be straightforward to fix.
> Fixing any would be better than fixing none IMO.
You are probably right.
> And I'd say mentioning the original title is unnecessary for the
> obvious ones, though we should get Robin's sanctioning for what we do.
> Is Robin perhaps available for some basic feedback?
I haven't heard from them, but if they chose to reach out it would be of
course most welcome!
- Chris
- Re: What's needed to get elisp updates into Guile master?, (continued)
- Re: What's needed to get elisp updates into Guile master?, Mathieu Lirzin, 2016/03/07
- Re: What's needed to get elisp updates into Guile master?, Christopher Allan Webber, 2016/03/07
- Re: What's needed to get elisp updates into Guile master?, Mathieu Lirzin, 2016/03/07
- Re: What's needed to get elisp updates into Guile master?, Christopher Allan Webber, 2016/03/07
- Re: What's needed to get elisp updates into Guile master?, Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer, 2016/03/09
- Re: What's needed to get elisp updates into Guile master?, Christopher Allan Webber, 2016/03/09
- Elisp branch ready for merge (??), Christopher Allan Webber, 2016/03/10
- Re: Elisp branch ready for merge (??), Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer, 2016/03/11
- Re: Elisp branch ready for merge (??), Christopher Allan Webber, 2016/03/11
- Re: Elisp branch ready for merge (??), Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer, 2016/03/12
- Re: Elisp branch ready for merge (??),
Christopher Allan Webber <=
- Re: Elisp branch ready for merge (??), Mathieu Lirzin, 2016/03/11
- Re: Elisp branch ready for merge (??), Christopher Allan Webber, 2016/03/11
- Re: Elisp branch ready for merge (??), Mathieu Lirzin, 2016/03/11
- Re: Elisp branch ready for merge (??), Christopher Allan Webber, 2016/03/25
Re: Guile & Emacs chat at emacs hackathon/bug-crush SF, Mikael Djurfeldt, 2016/03/16