From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Engster Subject: Re: Sync up the org in emacs master to org maint branch? Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2017 08:47:31 +0100 Message-ID: <87k29d7zvw.fsf@engster.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: In-Reply-To: (John Wiegley's message of "Sun, 29 Jan 2017 11:15:40 -0800") List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-devel" To: Kaushal Modi Cc: Bastien Guerry , Phillip Lord , emacs-org list , Emacs developers List-Id: emacs-orgmode.gnu.org John Wiegley writes: >>>>>> "KM" == Kaushal Modi writes: > > KM> If we are able the release the new packaging method in emacs 26.x, then we > KM> can remove org from emacs master completely, but if not, then at least as > KM> backup we have a newer org version to go out with that release. > > For Emacs 26, I intend the new ELPA process to be in place, whereby "default" > packages can be developed separately, and declare a way to get slip-streamed > into the release tarball so users are unaware of the separate nature of their > development. > > The CEDET developers have agreed to support this, and it sounds like you are > willing to as well. This is a misunderstanding. I said I wanted to move support for certain languages and project types into ELPA, not CEDET core. I'm still of the opinion that moving it completely to ELPA is a mistake. > If Lars is game, I'd like for Gnus to be third major > package we do this for initially. That will reduce considerably the number of > external files we track in Emacs.git. CEDET and Gnus are not external anymore. Both have abandonded their upstream repos and moved to Emacs, because the faster development of Emacs has made that necessary. -David