On Mon, Feb 13, 2017, 1:40 PM Kyle Meyer wrote:
> Rasmus writes:
>
> [...]
>
> > I think we have discussed it before, but the best way seems to just copy
> > the Org tree to the Emacs tree, right?
>
> Given the current setup, I think copying the files is best. I've
> already resolved the confli
Rasmus writes:
[...]
> I think we have discussed it before, but the best way seems to just copy
> the Org tree to the Emacs tree, right?
Given the current setup, I think copying the files is best. I've
already resolved the conflicts when backporting Org-related commits from
the Emacs repo.
--
Kyle Meyer writes:
> Hi Bastien,
>
> Bastien Guerry writes:
>
>> Kyle Meyer writes:
>>
>>> Kaushal Modi writes:
>>>
Kyle -- Would this be a good time to start the merge to emacs master?
>>>
From my standpoint, that'd be fine. I'm not aware of any outstanding
>>> patches that need to
Hi Bastien,
Bastien Guerry writes:
> Kyle Meyer writes:
>
>> Kaushal Modi writes:
>>
>>> Kyle -- Would this be a good time to start the merge to emacs master?
>>
>>>From my standpoint, that'd be fine. I'm not aware of any outstanding
>> patches that need to be backported from the Emacs repo.
Hi Kyle,
Kyle Meyer writes:
> Kaushal Modi writes:
>
>> Kyle -- Would this be a good time to start the merge to emacs master?
>
>>From my standpoint, that'd be fine. I'm not aware of any outstanding
> patches that need to be backported from the Emacs repo.
Before undertaking this, we need to
Kaushal Modi writes:
> Kyle -- Would this be a good time to start the merge to emacs master?
>From my standpoint, that'd be fine. I'm not aware of any outstanding
patches that need to be backported from the Emacs repo.
--
Kyle