From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/76409 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel,gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Gnus overrides.texi and WEBHACKDEVEL Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2011 05:25:06 -0500 Message-ID: References: <83ei7makon.fsf@gnu.org> <838vxuaek9.fsf@gnu.org> <877hdebm01.fsf_-_@lifelogs.com> <831v3ma532.fsf@gnu.org> <8739o2bjci.fsf@lifelogs.com> <83wrle8p8q.fsf@gnu.org> <87lj1t1wuz.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1296987930 2921 80.91.229.12 (6 Feb 2011 10:25:30 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2011 10:25:30 +0000 (UTC) Cc: tzz@lifelogs.com, ding@gnus.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Feb 06 11:25:26 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Pm1o2-0000oE-Br for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 06 Feb 2011 11:25:22 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35158 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Pm1o1-0002FW-Nh for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 06 Feb 2011 05:25:21 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=41257 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Pm1nt-0002A9-Ah for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 06 Feb 2011 05:25:16 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Pm1no-00011c-Sq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 06 Feb 2011 05:25:13 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]:52800) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Pm1no-00011Y-RH for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 06 Feb 2011 05:25:08 -0500 Original-Received: from eliz by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Pm1nm-0006iP-Sf; Sun, 06 Feb 2011 05:25:06 -0500 In-reply-to: <87lj1t1wuz.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> (stephen@xemacs.org) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.10 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:135641 gmane.emacs.gnus.general:76409 Archived-At: > From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" > Cc: Ted Zlatanov , > ding@gnus.org, > emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2011 15:49:08 +0900 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > > By "user" I _did_ mean developers in this case. How do we prevent the > > danger of committing a modified file? > > By using a real branch instead of a checkout. Are you saying that "bzr push" will somehow catch these problems where "bzr commit" in a bound branch doesn't? Even if so, the wiki recommends to use a bound branch, and I assume most (if not all) committers indeed use that.