Mathieu Lirzin writes: > Christopher Allan Webber <cweb...@dustycloud.org> writes: > >> Christopher Allan Webber writes: >> >>> So even better news: I've successfully rebased BT Templeton's wip elisp >>> branch on top of guile master... you can get it here: >>> >>> https://gitlab.com/dustyweb/guile/tree/merge-bipt-elisp-wip >>> >>> Maybe I should update the Guix package to make use of that? >> >> So I'd like to get this merged in before it bitrots too heavily. >> It would be a shame to not get it in, after how far it's come! > > Agreed. > >> Now that it's rebased and running on master, there are two issues I see >> that would need to be addressed: >> >> - The most recent commit disables three tests (specific to elisp). >> They should probably be re-enabled, or at worst at least commented >> out with a warning rather than being switched to expect-fail as they >> are right now. >> >> I'd prefer re-enabling them with fixes; for now, commenting out with >> clear explaination still seems better than bitrot though. (The other >> tests all do pass.) > > I don't understand why you would want to do that. 'expect-fail' is the > correct semantic for a test that should pass but is known to currently > fail, like in TDD. Do I miss something?
Ah, okay! Now I understand. So I think leaving these as-is is fine in merging this. >> - The commits are not in ChangeLog style format and are fairly terse in >> their message. I imagine it's a requirement to fix that. This seems >> like the bigger challenge; if anyone but the original author were to >> do it, there would have to be some careful reading to figure out what >> the purpose of each commit and change meant. That seems like some >> work. I'm not sure I have the time for it... are there any >> volunteers? > > You should bring that on emacs-devel where most people seem to think > that a 'git commit -m "..."' with the actual diff is self explanatory. > :) I'm afraid to. The emacs list has had strong responses moving between tremendous enthusiasm for the guile-emacs work to outright hostility. I think there are only a couple of hostile people, but they are vocal. I'd prefer to have the next stage of things merged before I reach out again. But maybe I'm being irrational. I could probably still ask for help. > Indeed, it seems a tedious job to add those change logs since it > requires to understand the purpose of the commit. The volunteer should > be familiar with Elisp in general and the limitations of > current/previous Guile implementation. Yeah it's tough. >> Is there general agreement that if we can get these two things done, >> that it would be worth merging this? > > I think it would be great. Great!
