Re: [COMMIT] Final Patches Before Initial Package Release

viteno> Ville Skyttä <scop(a)xemacs.org&gt; writes: viteno> seconded ... *drool* :-) If you're not going to update it, Norbert, submit a patch to kill it. I think that is sufficiently important documentation that it should be discussed, but when you and Ville both say it's out-of-date and redundant, I don't think there will be much objection. viteno> I update the 21.5 branch after each official package viteno> release and submit a patch against the 21.4 version. Right. The basic principles we operate on are (1) Nobody except the maintainer is trusted with stable code == the anointed core branch, currently 21.4, and packages with explicit maintainers. (2) Reviewers can commit or authorize commit to everything else. People occasionally make private branches (eg, the unsupported tree in packages or the Carbon and Qt branches of the core), and generally that should be (and is) respected. Everything has exceptions, of course, but that's the idea. viteno> I think packages.texi should be handled alike. I disagree. I think the documentation should go into the packages. Also, ISTR texinfo has a texi2txt option. We should texinfo-ize INSTALL, README etc and use that to generate it. It doesn't really matter how ugly, right, as long as <xemacs-beta(a)xemacs.org&gt; comes through clearly. ;-) -- Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp University of Tsukuba Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN Ask not how you can "do" free software business; ask what your business can "do for" free software.