Ganesh Sittampalam <[email protected]> writes: >> The Emacs integrations (vc-darcs, darcsum, dvc(?)) will probably be >> affected. This is the sort of reason I wanted vc-darcs in the darcs >> repo :-(. > > Can you remind me why it's not? The obvious issues that spring to mind > are the maintenance burden and also managing copyright assignment to FSF.
See the comment in <http://bugs.darcs.net/msg9586>. I don't understand why it needs an assignment for darcs, but the main reason for writing it was the assignment. It's maintained for the versions I use, but I confess I can't keep up with the rate at which Emacs breaks things these days, and it really needs some changes in Emacs (or did when I last checked). > From the point of view of the maintenance burden, I wouldn't be opposed > to adding it if it could come with a set of shell tests that would make > it easy to see when something it relied on was broken/changed. I don't know how difficult that would be for vc-darcs off-hand. It probably would be more difficult for darcsum (which, unfortunately, needs to know about essentially all of darcs' output). I don't know how I'd go abut writing tests for commands which produce asynchronous output to a buffer; I suspect that's a fair amount of work. I should have said that any change like this needs to be easy to test for, so that things like vc-darcs can adjust as necessary to support different versions. If it can be done reliably by the darcs version number, that should be OK. _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
