[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Guile 3 and wip-elisp/Emacs

From: Robin Templeton
Subject: Re: Guile 3 and wip-elisp/Emacs
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2021 15:34:03 -0400
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux)

Christine Lemmer-Webber <> writes:

> Ludovic Courtès <> writes:
>> Hello!
>> Christine Lemmer-Webber <> skribis:
>>> I've pushed this as origin/wip-elisp-rebased.  I actually rebased it
>>> again, making some naming adjustments for myself and a couple of
>>> adjustments having talked to Robin.
>>> If nobody objects, I'd like to merge this into main.  Maintainers, if
>>> you have any objections, speak now or forever hold these commits!
>> I haven’t looked at the branch, but I think it’s great to see it live
>> and it’s great if it can be merged!
> I just compiled the rebased version and will be playing with it little
> bits over the next few days to make sure it's reasonably good.
>> Some things to pay attention to before merging to ‘main’, since it
>> corresponds to the current 3.0 stable branch:
>>   • Make sure no backward incompatibilities are introduced in
>>     preexisting modules;
>>   • Make sure the ABI of and that of public modules
>>     is unchanged, or is changed compatibly;
> There are, I think, two commits that could use review, but I am NOT the
> right person to do this.
>   4e96211eb666751b8666beb918bf3108aa1c725b intern arbitrary constants
>   433fc448ddb018767906f8808203c9668c68cd83 multiple obarrays

I'll take a look at these...

> [...] (and maybe the "guile-private-ref" and "allow
> arbitrary constants in cps" commits look relevant too).

and these, but concur that Andy is the best person to review them, and I
agree that Andy should approve the merge overall in any case.

Still reviewing the wip-elisp-rebased branch in my spare time; so far I
haven't found any noteworthy problems, not that I was expecting to :)

A minor point: IMHO the "(Best-ability ChangeLog annotation ...)" lines
aren't the ideal way to credit you, in terms of commit message
formatting. I'd prefer using git 'trailers' for in-commit credit, so
that it's obvious to both humans and git that it's commit metadata. I'm
not sure there's a conventional git trailer for this...something like
'ChangeLog-by:' would be probably be clear enough. But if you prefer the
current formatting and it works with Guile's ChangeLog generator, I
don't mind leaving it as-is (except perhaps "s/Best-ability //" after
I've reviewed everything :)) WDYT?


"You have to act as if it were possible to radically transform the
world. And you have to do it all the time." -- Angela Davis

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]