emacs-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: Adding refactoring capabilities to Emacs


From: Dmitry Gutov
Subject: Re: Adding refactoring capabilities to Emacs
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2023 20:44:59 +0300
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.13.0

On 29/09/2023 20:36, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2023 20:20:46 +0300
Cc:ams@gnu.org,joaotavora@gmail.com,monnier@iro.umontreal.ca,
  philipk@posteo.net,emacs-devel@gnu.org
From: Dmitry Gutov<dmitry@gutov.dev>

On 29/09/2023 18:20, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2023 13:21:43 +0300
Cc:ams@gnu.org,joaotavora@gmail.com,monnier@iro.umontreal.ca,
   philipk@posteo.net,emacs-devel@gnu.org
From: Dmitry Gutov<dmitry@gutov.dev>

Correction: C-x v v.
That functionality of "C-x v v" is only available for Git (and
basically is undocumented), so it's too early to declare victory.
It's available for Git, for Hg (two separate dedicated implementations),
and for the other VCSes too on best-effort basis (see the function
vc-default-checkin-patch).
Yes, I found this out by now, thanks.  Which makes it even worse that
no documentation of "C-x v v" mentions that, anywhere!  (And many
things that "C-x v v" did for years aren't documented, either, sigh.)

We should do better than that.
We should. But the problem started at the "no feedback" step.

When there is no interest even among the greybeards on this list, why
spend extra effort advertising something untested?
I'm not sure I follow: the undocumented features I had in mind were
released with Emacs 29.1.  So if it was untested, why did we release
it?

Same as we do most other new features' interaction with old VCSes (CVS, RCS, SCCS and the rest of the zoo): they had 9 months to "stabilize".

FWIW, if nobody's using it, it's not hurting anybody either.

Anyway, Juri did test it a little with Bzr, and I - with Hg, before the latter grew a dedicated implementation, but there was no feedback regarding any of the others. Would we document it as "definitely works with Git/Hg, seemingly with Bzr, and probably with some of the others"?



reply via email to

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