Re: ruby-modes update
On Wed, 2009-07-15 at 17:01 +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Do you need a separate ruby-electric.el.upstream? We generally only
use that convention for collisions of very different files (in
particular, our Makefile is rarely at all similar to an upstream
Makefile), or files that for some reason we do not want to be loaded
in the XEmacs version.
I was just following what seemed to be the convention in the existing
ruby-modes package, since it had .upstream files for the other .el files
already. But I agree, it certainly isn't needed for ruby-electric.el,
and I'll have another critical look at the others as well. A vendor
branch or something similar is probably a good idea.
Kind regards,
Hans
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Patches mailing list
XEmacs-Patches(a)xemacs.org
http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-patches
Attachments:
- signature.asc (application/pgp-signature — 198 bytes)