[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: patch vs. overwrite in bzr

From: Richard Stallman
Subject: Re: patch vs. overwrite in bzr
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2012 20:17:04 -0400

    As I see it, the main reason for Org to use a separate repository
    is to gather an active community around a central place.

    Regular Org testers don't want to rebuild Emacs each time they have 
    to test a new feature in Org.

Doesn't bzr allow them to do all the same things while
using the Emacs repository?

    There is no legal reason for not using the Emacs repository as the
    canonical repository for Org.  Just a practical one: doing so would
    force us to maintain the canonical Org repository in Emacs *and* 
    another repository for things that are useful to Org and that cannot
    be part of Emacs.

I am concerned that this practice is harmful.
Would we want these things to be part of Emacs?
If not, then it isn't a problem.
But if so, distributing them with Org in this way
is undermining our efforts.

Dr Richard Stallman
President, Free Software Foundation
51 Franklin St
Boston MA 02110
www.fsf.org  www.gnu.org
Skype: No way! That's nonfree (freedom-denying) software.
  Use free telephony http://directory.fsf.org/category/tel/

reply via email to

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