Hi Adam, all, Adam Porter writes:
[...] > > By the way, I'm curious, not having always followed the internal details > of Org's development over the years: why are changes like that made to > emacs.git and merged back into Org, instead of being made in Org and > then merged back into Emacs with the next sync? It seems like it could > be a burden, requiring someone like you to track them and merge them, > but there's probably a good reason for this workflow. > Speaking from personal experience/observations, as far as I know the Emacs developers don't have strict rules about having uni-directional changes. And this is not unique to Org; I've seen similar changes in both directions in other projects developed outside emacs.git that are periodically merged into emacs.git. Eliminating the need for keeping track of such changes is one potential argument for developing Org -- and those other similar packages -- inside emacs.git itself. :) -- https://bndl.org
