Re: Converted git repository available for review

[Paul Eggert]

Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> What I've
> done is treat the Bazaar ignore files as authoritative for those
> revisions during which Bazaar was in use, ignoring .gitignores during
> that period.  The other major possibility would be to simply remove
> .bzrignores where .gitignore files exist.

Sorry, I'm not really following all that, as I haven't read the lift 
script.  Still, it puzzles me that the result is a .gitignore that has 
the wrong data in it, in the sense that it has an arch tag, something 
that is clearly wrong since we went through and removed those.  If we're 
generating .gitignore files from .bzrignore files, and if the .bzrignore 
file just before the bzr-to-git transition lacks an arch tag, why would 
the .gitignore file after the transition have it?  And if we're using 
some other process to generate the .gitignore file, then how did it 
manage to keep the arch tags even though we removed them?

How about if we fix the .bzrignore and .gitignore files to agree now, by 
hand, so that this part of the bzr-to-git transition is a no-op?

> But how much do we care about fewer than 108 overlong lines, really?
> I'm not even sure your small effort would be really justified, let
> alone my larger one.

I know some people care about readable ChangeLog entries.  We edit them 
even years after they were written to fix typos, for example.  It's 
worth the small effort, though not the larger one.

I wrote earlier that these changes could be made to the bzr trunk now, 
but since they're so small and niggling we might as well make them to 
the emacs-24 branch.