emacs-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: Android port of Emacs


From: Dmitry Gutov
Subject: Re: Android port of Emacs
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2023 15:04:07 +0300
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.11.0

On 19/06/2023 03:39, Po Lu wrote:
Dmitry Gutov <dmitry@gutov.dev> writes:

Ah, so you are worried about maintaining a separate project infrastructure.

Personally, I really recommend you try
Gitlab/Github/SourceHut/Gogs/etc. If you can bear with using any of
those, I'm almost certain that you will receive more and better bug
reports through those, and maybe even additional
contributors/maintainers.

The repository or issue tracker infrastructure is not really the
problem, having to observe a separate bug report address (and direct
unrelated bugs back to bug-gnu-emacs) is.  There's also the problem of
managing the copyright assignment paperwork: I don't have access to
copyright.list, so anyone who wants to work on the Android port will
have to go back and forth between me and emacs-devel, which adds
difficulty as well.

That shouldn't be a problem either: as a maintainer of a new project working under GNU with required CA, you'll be able to request access to the machine where the list resides. I have.

Some larger time period could give more data, but so far it sounds
like both conclusions can work relatively easily then: keeping Android
port internally wouldn't result in too many additional conflicts for
others to excise. But keeping it in external repo (or branch)
shouldn't results in frequent conflicts either. And as a bonus, you
don't have to use the same file for NEWS, so those 3-4 conflicts you
mention would be avoided.

There's also a certain mental burden associated with maintaining a
separate project, which I'm not comfortable with.  The same goes for the
notion of starting what is essentially a fork of Emacs: we've seen the
waste of resources that was XEmacs and is now the spin-off Carbon Emacs.

My experience is that it's no that big a deal. And XEmacs was a very different affair.

But I can understand that maintaining a new project in the same directory tree can feel unnatural. If different toolkits could be structures as plugins, it would look more sensible, but we are ways off from that possibility, of course.



reply via email to

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