Re: [AUCTeX-devel] Converting AUCTeX CVS to a modern dVCS

[Ivan Andrus]

On Aug 1, 2012, at 9:53 PM, Tassilo Horn wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> I'd love to move the auctex sources to some modern distributed version
> control system.  I now had some time to do some testing, and AFAICS the
> conversions look ok.  There are some minor things that need to be fixed,
> e.g., there are some old committers I don't know and that aren't listed
> on the savannah project page.

Awesome!  I would love to see this happen, particularly if it can help
development along.  I haven't had much time for AUCTeX development
(and maybe never will), but using a dvcs might make it easier to make
and contribute a few small fixes here and there since I wouldn't have
to worry about getting commit access etc.

Once it's on another VCS it will become easier to install it via MELPA.

> It would be good if others have a look at the conversions to check if
> everything's allright.
> 
> Ok, so there's one conversion to Git.  You can clone it like so:
> 
>  % git clone http://tsdh.org/auctex.git
> 
> And alternatively, there's a conversion to GNU Bazaar.  Branch the trunk
> branch like so (right now, there's no support for cloning a complete
> shared repo with all branches, but it's on the bzr TODO list):
> 
>  % bzr branch http://www.tsdh.org/auctex.bzr/trunk auctex
> 
> I don't have a strong opinion about what dVCS we'll eventually use.  Git
> seems to be a bit more popular (I also know it much better) and the Git
> repo is about 10 times smaller than the bzr one.  Bazaar on the other
> hand is a GNU project like AUCTeX and claims to be easier to use and
> probably better supported on Windows.
> 
> Opinions, problems, suggestions welcome!

Personally, I'm a big fan of technical rather than political
decisions.  I don't know either git or bzr very well (I use mostly
hg), but I would slightly prefer git since there are several other
projects that I am interested in which use git.

For some reason I thought that AUCTeX would eventually be hosted
inside the emacs tree.  Is that true at all?  If that is a long term
goal it _might_ be a reason to prefer bzr.

-Ivan