On 2/13/11 10:13 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Raymond Toy writes:
> Is there a reason why the packages haven't moved to an hg repo like
> xemacs has?
In principle, that's the plan.
In practice, it's a much harder problem. First, the technical issues.
Having never had to deal with the package sources, I wasn't aware of
these issues. Thanks for point them out.
Second, the people issues. Everybody knows how to use CVS, even if
they don't like it or are no longer using it themselves. But many of
Yes, that's always a problem. Personally, CVS has always done
everything I've ever needed.
our external maintainers don't know hg yet; Emacs is using bzr,
Do you know of a good hg mode for xemacs? I tried mecurial.el, which
doesn't work at all. My attempt at getting dvc going has so far failed.
But I am using git.el which seems to be working quite nicely with
xemacs. A big bonus with git.el is that it's mostly compatible with
pcl-cvs, which I've been using since forever.
many of them strongly prefer git (as I do, but I have learned to
worked around or avert my eyes from what I consider to be hg's
warts). Even once we have a prototype conversion, we'll still need to
Could you elaborate on what the warts are? (Privately, if you prefer.)
I'm just starting to use git and hg for a couple of projects.
Volunteers welcome, although Michael Sperber seems to have a handle
where to go next so please talk to him before putting in effort.
I would volunteer, but since I don't maintain any package and have never
dealt with package building, I can't offer much more than say testing
things out as an occasional user.
XEmacs-Beta mailing list