Hi Amin, Amin Bandali <band...@gnu.org> 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. :) That would be an interesting development, indeed. :) Thanks.
