Re: unicode-2 and multitty

[David Kastrup]

address@hidden (Kim F. Storm) writes:

> Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> writes:
>
>>> Maybe you don't need to import the multitty changes as a branch
>>> in CVS.  I suppose that the changes can be committed directly on the
>>> TRUNK as a (big) set of changes.
>>
>> I might be sufficient, but I think it might also be worthwhile to first
>> commit it on a separate branch and then try and merge it.
>> It just seems conceptually cleaner, leaving a clear and recognizable trace
>> of the branch before it was merged.
>
> For that, you can just put a "BEFORE_MULTITTY_MERGE" tag on the trunk.

The disadvantage is that while the merge is in progress, the trunk
will not be usable.

However,
a) unless I am mistaken, Károly's version of the multitty code _is_
essentially merged with the trunk already (though trunk moves
onward).  The merge will just be concerned with stuff checked in since
the last synch.
b) if trunk does not work right away, this would be a strong incentive
for people to fix this.

So we basically need two things to go ahead
a) Károly's opinion of the state of his archive, and his possible
resources/involvement for putting the stuff into branch or trunk.
b) the "go ahead" from Richard.

While Richard has been looking for a maintainer for 23.x, it would
appear to me that actually commencing the merge would not require a
previous appointment of a different maintainer.

-- 
David Kastrup