=== marienz_ is now known as marirenz
=== marirenz is now known as marienz_
=== marienz_ is now known as marienz
=== deryck_ is now known as deryck[lunch]
=== deryck[lunch] is now known as deryck
SamBjelmer: so, #emacs was wondering if you could break it to rms that bzr is dead and it is time to move on ...22:04
SamBevidently, "I think it's time to move on" isn't quite explicit enough22:04
JordiGHjelmer: Can you send an email to rms to tell him that bzr is dead and GNU should no longer use it?22:06
lifelessJordiGH: why should jelmer do that? He is no more authoritative than e.g. I am, or poolie... we don't work for Canonical anymore22:10
JordiGHlifeless: Alright, can you do it?22:10
SamBdoes canonical even pay *anyone* to work on bzr anymore?22:12
lifelessSamB: I don't know, not working there. Which is my point.22:13
lifelessIf you want a statement from someone with actual knowledge, you need to ask the sponsor.22:13
JordiGHlifeless: rms won't let us go until there's a clear message that bzr is completely unmaintained and unviable.22:13
JordiGHNot a blog post, not a wishy-washy "I think..." or "perhaps if we did this, bzr could revive", but a resounding NO on bzr.22:14
=== elmo__ is now known as elmo
lifelessJordiGH: So unmaintained means 'set of active maintainers is empty', and while I can say that I am not focused on maintaining bzr anymore (though I still have commit rights AFAIK), I can't say 'the set of active maintainers is empty' because - I /don't know/.22:15
lifelessJordiGH: mgz or vila or jam may know.22:15
JordiGHlifeless: Do you have their email?22:16
lifelessJordiGH: sure, its all over the place ;)22:16
JordiGHWhich place?22:16
lifelessbzr devel mailing list, package metadata for bzr packages, commit logs...22:17
PengThis is a sad conversation.22:17
SamBhmm, jam apparantly was the most recent to commit22:17
lifelessit is a sad conversation, its also an odd one, because AFAIK Canonical are still maintaining bzr.22:18
lifeless-> not dead.22:18
JordiGHUgh, then how do we kill it de jure? It's already dead de facto.22:18
JordiGHDo we need to tell sabdfl to explicitly kill it?22:18
SamBor did he just approve it or something22:18
lifelessSamB: jam approved a proposal from a Dylan22:19
lifeless McCall22:19
SamByes, with -n0 that becomes clearer22:19
lifelessJordiGH: why do you want bzr killed ?22:19
SamBit isn't working very well for Emacs, but rms is extremely stubborn22:20
JordiGHlifeless: Because rms won't Emacs stop using bzr unless bzr is officially pronounced dead, and there's a huge majority of users that are mighty pissed off about bzr being used for Emacs. It's a horrible and divisive thorn in the Emacs community. It needs to be excised.22:20
lifelessXemacs V2 ?22:20
elmo*blink* why do users care about bzr being used for Emacs?22:21
elmodo you mean developers?22:21
SamBthis is Emacs, how do you tell which is which?22:21
elmoSamB: pretty easily, IMO?  I'm an emacs user, for example.  I've never known or cared what VCS emacs is developed in22:22
SamBI have papers, but they wanted me to (essentially) rebase -i my code and I obviously cannot do that with bzr ...22:23
elmoI'm not suggesting emacs should continue to use bzr; I'm simply suggesting that trying to get the entire bzr project officially killed to stop emacs using it is something of an overreaction/overreach22:24
SamByeah, probably22:25
JordiGHelmo: It's already dead, just not officially.22:26
elmoJordiGH: no, like lifeless said, dead would be that it has no active maintainers22:26
JordiGHelmo: Then why won't the active maintainers not fix the bugs that Emacs has reported years ago?22:27
elmoI don't know that it has or hasn't and I'm pretty sure you don't know that22:27
JordiGHNor even acknowledge them?22:27
SamBJordiGH: would rms be satisfied by a statement that it was 99% dead?22:27
JordiGHSamB: No, he's already gotten that statement22:27
lifelessJordiGH: which bugs haven't been acknowledged?22:28
SamBJordiGH: which bub numbers do you mean?22:28
JordiGHThe one that affects the ELPA repo.22:28
elmoJordiGH: I've reported bugs in many many free software projects that never get acknowledgement or fixed (I'm pretty sure some of my Debian bugs have been opened > 10 years at this point); it doesn't mean these projects are dead22:29
JordiGHelmo: Can we declare it dead for Emacs, then?22:29
lifelessJordiGH: thats up to Emacs surely...22:30
JordiGHlifeless: No, Emacs needs a statement from bzr.22:30
* SamB wonders why rms even gets a vote22:30
JordiGHlifeless: rms will not relent otherwise.22:30
lifelessYou want the bzr community to say they don't want Emacs to use bzr?22:31
JordiGHlifeless: YES22:31
* SamB doesn't see how a project with as much wrong with it as bzr has can be considered "alive" when the time between commits to trunk is measured in months ...22:34
=== r0bby_ is now known as robbyoconnor
jelmerSamB, JordiGH: I don't think I'm the right person for that23:14
SamBoh, JordiGH disconnected; I guess expecting him to come here because I pasted that in #emacs doesn't make sense ...23:19
SamBjelmer: who would be better to ask?23:20
lifelessYou could ask on the list, but I think its a crazy thing to ask. What community will say 'go away' to a user that they wany to support23:21
jelmerSamB: somebody currently involved in Bazaar23:25
SamBjelmer: I only have to go 3 commits back to find one from you ...23:26
SamBthat seems current enough to *me*23:26
jelmerSamB: that's a commit from last year I think?23:27
jelmerSamB: Anyway, IIRC there is an official GNU maintainer for Bazaar. In the past that was mbp, today it's probably jam?23:28
jelmerbut I also agree with lifeless that it's a strange question to ask23:30
jelmerthen again, I also thought the process with which emacs chose bzr as its vcs at the time was odd23:32

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!