headers
Stefan Reichör | 1 Nov 2008 09:39
Picon

Re: How dvc fits in

Stephen Leake <stephen_leake <at> stephe-leake.org> writes:

> Richard Riley <rileyrgdev <at> googlemail.com> writes:
>
>> I have just spent some time looking at git alternatives for
>> Emacs. Unfortunately somewhere along the way I lost the wood for the
>> trees and just spent a day fighting clashing versions which is now
>> cleared. The Main reason was the inclusion of Git in the basic Emacs
>> 23.0 suite. Which leads me to the, naive no doubt, question of "Why
>> DVC"? The included Version Control supports a host of back ends as is
>> and so I have to ask why the need for DVC?  I understand it does cover
>> some of the backends not supported in Emacs Version Control. Is it
>> possibly history and DVC was conceived prior to the rewrite of the built
>> in VC?
>
> The short answer is that DVC is to plain Emacs VC for git (and mtn,
> bzr etc) as PCL-CVS is to plain Emacs VC for CVS.
>
> You can do lots of CVS operations with plain Emacs VC, but the PCL-CVS
> interface is more organized, and just better for almost all CVS
> operations.
>
> With systems that check in all files in the workspace in one atomic
> commit, it is even more important to use an interface that shows all
> files that will be committed, not just the ones in some directory.
>
> I have an intro to Emacs DVC for mtn at
> http://gds.gsfc.nasa.gov/dvc-intro.html
>
> We really need to rewrite the DVC manual.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Oleksandr Gavenko | 2 Nov 2008 17:53
Picon
Gravatar

Re: DVC debian package rejected

Michael Olson wrote:
> RMS definitely prefers the GFDL.  I remember reading something to that
> effect when the Org manual was being talked about on the emacs-devel
> list.
> 
> Carsten, what was the eventual outcome with the Debian package for Org
> and the licensing of the Org manual?
> 
Debian policy restrict packages with GFDL. See
"General Resolution: Why the GNU Free Documentation License is not 
suitable for Debian main"
http://www.debian.org/vote/2006/vote_001

Some books has GPL licence:
http://www.gnu.org/doc/other-free-books.html

This include "Debian GNU/Linux: Guide to Installation and Usage"
"Open Source Development with CVS". Exist example another licence.

Open Publication License also non-free for Debian policy.
See package autobook as example.

> For Emacs inclusion we need to have an LGPL manual, isn't it ?

LGPL differ from GPL mainly ability link proprietary software with LGPL 
shared libraries.
So there is no any benefit from LGPL before GPL.

I am not expert but all I see stop on GPL.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Michael Olson | 2 Nov 2008 18:44
Face
Picon
Picon

Re: DVC debian package rejected

Michael Olson <mwolson <at> gnu.org> writes:

> Daniel Dehennin <daniel.dehennin <at> baby-gnu.org> writes:
>
>> Le 5534 Septembre 1993, Stefan Reichör a envoyé:
>>> I am no license expert. But I think that all manual authors will
>>> agree to any license that will be free enough to have the manual
>>> included in debian.
>>
>> What about Emacs inclusion ?
>>
>> For Emacs inclusion we need to have an LGPL manual, isn't it ?
>
> RMS definitely prefers the GFDL.  I remember reading something to that
> effect when the Org manual was being talked about on the emacs-devel
> list.
>
> Carsten, what was the eventual outcome with the Debian package for Org
> and the licensing of the Org manual?

Following up, every single manual in Emacs' doc/misc directory is
licensed under GFDL, with no dual-licensing.  It would be possible to
maintain a separately-licensed copy *outside* of the Emacs tree, but
we'd have to be very careful about not propagating changes verbatim from
one copy to the other, and get permission from every current copyright
holder, including myself.

In short, this is more trouble than it's worth, and we should tell
Debian users to either (1) use a published version of the manual from
our website and don't distribute the manual with Debian, or (2) make a
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 9 comments |
headers
Oleksandr Gavenko | 2 Nov 2008 19:15
Picon
Gravatar

Re: DVC debian package rejected

Oleksandr Gavenko пишет:
> I am not expert but all I see stop on GPL.

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#WhyNotGPLForManuals
say that GPL accepted for docs, but it mainly designed for software, so 
many sections of licence are not applicable.

And they prefer GFDL.

Also exist draft of GSFDL
http://gplv3.fsf.org/comments/gsfdl-draft-1.html
which must satisfy as FSF as Debian team.

--

-- 

Best regards.

_______________________________________________
Dvc-dev mailing list
Dvc-dev <at> gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/dvc-dev
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Xavier Maillard | 3 Nov 2008 10:25
Picon

Re: DVC debian package rejected

Hi,

   Getting the manual into Emacs matters a hell of a lot more than getting
   the manual into Debian.

100% agree with that conclusion.

	Xavier
--

-- 
http://www.gnu.org
http://www.april.org
http://www.lolica.org
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Richard Riley | 3 Nov 2008 13:54

dvc pull


Could dvc-pull from the menu bar or the using "M f" in the status buffer
possibly be a bit more informative? I thought it was not working for a
while in the case the repository was already up to date.

regards

Richard.
Permalink | Reply | 5 comments |
headers
Richard Riley | 3 Nov 2008 17:01

dvc and git


I am trying to write a short beginners tutorial to using DVC with GIT in
emacs.

I can not see how to do the most important development step - create a
branch. Can someone advise? Or must this be done from the command line
for the time being? If so, is there something on the way? Having
evaluated the different UIs for GIT in emacs I think DVC seems the most
proficient and would like to encourage and help people in its adoption.

regards

richard.

--

-- 
 important and urgent problems of the technology of today are no longer the satisfactions of the primary
needs or of archetypal wishes, but the reparation of the evils and damages by the technology of yesterday. 
~Dennis Gabor, Innovations:  Scientific, Technological and Social, 1970
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Alex Ott | 3 Nov 2008 17:08
Picon
Gravatar

Re: dvc and git

Hello

>>>>> "RR" == Richard Riley writes:
 RR> I am trying to write a short beginners tutorial to using DVC with GIT
 RR> in emacs.

 RR> I can not see how to do the most important development step - create a
 RR> branch. Can someone advise? Or must this be done from the command line
 RR> for the time being? If so, is there something on the way? Having
 RR> evaluated the different UIs for GIT in emacs I think DVC seems the
 RR> most proficient and would like to encourage and help people in its
 RR> adoption.

You can look to my article about DVC -
http://xtalk.msk.su/~ott/en/writings/emacs-vcs/EmacsDVC.html, but it
contain description only of pull/push/clone.  In DVC repository specific
function could be implemented separately, but currently DVC contains only
xgit-branches-list, but i couldn't found xgint-make-branch, etc.

About Git-specific packages: Have you looked to magit package? It implement
many of git-specific functions.  I plan to update my article about Emacs +
Git interaction, and it will contain information about different packages,
including standard git.el

--

-- 
With best wishes, Alex Ott, MBA
http://alexott.blogspot.com/           http://xtalk.msk.su/~ott/
http://alexott-ru.blogspot.com/
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Richard Riley | 3 Nov 2008 17:39

Re: dvc and git

Alex Ott <alexott <at> gmail.com> writes:

> Hello
>
>>>>>> "RR" == Richard Riley writes:
>  RR> I am trying to write a short beginners tutorial to using DVC with GIT
>  RR> in emacs.
>
>  RR> I can not see how to do the most important development step - create a
>  RR> branch. Can someone advise? Or must this be done from the command line
>  RR> for the time being? If so, is there something on the way? Having
>  RR> evaluated the different UIs for GIT in emacs I think DVC seems the
>  RR> most proficient and would like to encourage and help people in its
>  RR> adoption.
>
> You can look to my article about DVC -
> http://xtalk.msk.su/~ott/en/writings/emacs-vcs/EmacsDVC.html, but it
> contain description only of pull/push/clone.  In DVC repository
> specific

There is a clash of terms with Pull - maybe you can clarify. Is DVC pull
different from git pull? Since git pull is documented as merging the
changes.

The asynchronous nature of dvc pull also caused me some issues since
there was no indication of it actually doing anything - and suddenly a
minute later a buffer appeared :-;

> function could be implemented separately, but currently DVC contains only
> xgit-branches-list, but i couldn't found xgint-make-branch, etc.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Stefan Reichör | 3 Nov 2008 20:06
Picon

Re: dvc pull

Hi Richard!

> Could dvc-pull from the menu bar or the using "M f" in the status buffer
> possibly be a bit more informative? I thought it was not working for a
> while in the case the repository was already up to date.

I tried it with a git repository that I am tracking.

Here is the behaviour that I see:

* M-x dvc-pull
=> DVC running appears in the modeline
=> The message "Already up-to-date." appears as status message.

Does the same happen for you?

If yes, what behaviour do you expect?

Stefan.
Permalink | Reply | 4 comments |

Gmane