emacs-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: Move to git is not imminent - esr is just tired of talking about it


From: Karl Fogel
Subject: Re: Move to git is not imminent - esr is just tired of talking about it
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2014 14:06:27 -0600
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux)

Juanma Barranquero <address@hidden> writes:
>I don't want to switch to Mercurial, so I'm not "siding" with Jordi
>here. I like Bazaar, but I don't oppose switching to git. But Jordi's
>right, the move to git is *not* imminent.
>
>I'm sorry, but I don't see why Eric, who (according to my brief
>perusal of the list's archive) has not posted on emacs-devel for about
>five years, suddenly has the right to appear here, "suggest" that the
>time has come to switch to git, and we should just say "yeah" on *his*
>terms.
>
>- He's not bringing any new argument that has not been discussed
>before; the only difference is that Richard and Stefan seem to accept
>now that Bazaar is beyond hope.
>
>- His message urging us to switch was posted *four days ago*.
>
>- He's appointed himself to the role of technical director of the
>switch, deciding when and how we should do it, whether Savannah git
>facilities are up to the task, timelines, etc. Why? There's no other
>Emacs people with git and/or Savannah experience?

Whether or not there are such people, did you see any of them
volunteering, the way ESR did?

>- Last, but not least: emacs-devel was not a democracy before, and it
>is not now. Voting and informal polls are great, but at the end of the
>day, it's Richard's and Stefan's opinion that counts. Yes, I know that
>Eric's message's header says "awaiting Stefan's approval", but
>frankly, this:
>
>> Stefan, please either (a) confirm that you as the official maintainer
>> are authorizing this, or (b) put a hold on it and explain what
>> additional steps or conditions you deem necessary before we move.
>
>is not how a polite request should look IMO. And, I'm sorry, but even
>if Stefan says that it's OK and Eric's done nothing wrong and I have
>my foot firmly in my mouth, I will still believe that we're being
>pushed for no particular reason other than Eric's whims.

ESR is just trying to get something done in a fairly typical way that we
try to get things done around here.  He didn't "appoint himself"
technical director for the move -- he *volunteered* to do it, and when
no one else stepped forward volunteering the same, ESR proceeded on the
reasonable assumption that the responsibility was his.

Maybe he's being a little pushy as to schedule (I agree the switchover
can wait until after the release), but pushy isn't a sin -- in this case
it may be a virtue :-) -- and it's quite clear that ESR isn't going to
argue if Stefan says to wait until after the freeze is over (or for
whatever reason).  ESR's just trying to get something done, and has laid
his goals out clearly.  It's not just his whim: other people have been
saying for a long time that this move would be desirable.  It happened
that ESR's message came at the right moment, with bzr's decline finally
unmistakeable.

-K



reply via email to

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