[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Ok to backport Eshell manual improvements to 29?
From: |
Michael Albinus |
Subject: |
Re: Ok to backport Eshell manual improvements to 29? |
Date: |
Thu, 13 Jul 2023 09:14:04 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) |
Jim Porter <jporterbugs@gmail.com> writes:
Hi Jim,
> I just pushed a branch - "scratch/backport-eshell-docs-to-29" - that
> backports all the relevant changes to the Eshell manual that are
> currently on master. I've double-checked that the documentation all
> looks right to me (specifically that the 29 branch doesn't mention any
> features only present on master), but before I merge to the 29 branch,
> I wanted to give others the chance to look over the changes too.
>
> I've opted not to squash any of the commits and to add a note to each
> commit message indicating the Git SHA for each master
> commit. Hopefully that will make it easier if anyone needs to look
> back on these commits in the future.
I haven't checked each commit. Just a diff between eshell.texi in master
and scratch/backport-eshell-docs-to-29. One minor nit: in node
Variables, you have deleted "@vindex $INSIDE_EMACS". Pls keep it.
Otherwise, it LGTM.
Best regards, Michael.
- Ok to backport Eshell manual improvements to 29?, Jim Porter, 2023/07/12
- Re: Ok to backport Eshell manual improvements to 29?,
Michael Albinus <=
- Re: Ok to backport Eshell manual improvements to 29?, Jim Porter, 2023/07/13
- Re: Ok to backport Eshell manual improvements to 29?, Jim Porter, 2023/07/13
- Re: Ok to backport Eshell manual improvements to 29?, Juri Linkov, 2023/07/14
- Re: Ok to backport Eshell manual improvements to 29?, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/07/14
- Re: Ok to backport Eshell manual improvements to 29?, Jim Porter, 2023/07/14
- Re: Ok to backport Eshell manual improvements to 29?, Juri Linkov, 2023/07/14