From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eric Abrahamsen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#34776: Acknowledgement (27.0.50; Some questions about choose-completion-string-functions) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 00:29:13 -0700 Message-ID: <87tvf6gvxy.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> References: <871s3jeh8m.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <87zhq4zzcz.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <871s3a90qo.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <87imvmbube.fsf@gmail.com> <87mukyiczg.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <877ec2iau1.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="132869"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) To: 34776@debbugs.gnu.org Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Apr 10 09:30:14 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hE7gS-000YQW-7F for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 09:30:12 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54960 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hE7gR-0003d0-84 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 03:30:11 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:42839) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hE7gK-0003cm-Rg for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 03:30:05 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hE7gJ-0002Kz-QU for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 03:30:04 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:38812) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hE7gJ-0002Kr-Kx for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 03:30:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hE7gJ-0001Xo-Ew for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 03:30:03 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org In-Reply-To: <871s3jeh8m.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> Resent-From: Eric Abrahamsen Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 07:30:03 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 34776 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-Debbugs-Original-To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-Received: via spool by submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B.15548813825885 (code B ref -1); Wed, 10 Apr 2019 07:30:03 +0000 Original-Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Apr 2019 07:29:42 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52356 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hE7fy-0001Wr-0c for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 03:29:42 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:56605) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hE7fv-0001Wb-Hn for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 03:29:40 -0400 Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:32910) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hE7fp-0001zw-08 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 03:29:33 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:42753) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hE7fn-0003bI-Vu for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 03:29:32 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hE7fm-0001xo-M7 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 03:29:31 -0400 Original-Received: from [195.159.176.226] (port=32976 helo=blaine.gmane.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hE7fm-0001x3-Dv for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 03:29:30 -0400 Original-Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hE7fj-000XZV-CX for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 09:29:27 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Cancel-Lock: sha1:KOpjuZAm6gss+PdGcrJAEJggNxw= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 209.51.188.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:157451 Archived-At: Eric Abrahamsen writes: > Eli Zaretskii writes: > >> On April 10, 2019 9:35:47 AM GMT+03:00, Eric Abrahamsen wrote: >>> Eli Zaretskii writes: >>> >>> > On April 10, 2019 6:29:10 AM GMT+03:00, Glenn Morris >>> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> > And it can go to emacs-26 since it's a doc fix. >>> >> >>> >> The RC said Emacs 26.2 was to be released March 27... >>> >> Part of making a release is for people to stop changing that >>> branch. >>> > >>> > Unfortunately, that ship has sailed, since within an hour of RC >>> > release a new commit was pushed to the release branch, and another >>> one >>> > a week later, without asking. So now the RC tarball will not be able >>> > to be renamed anyway, and the rationale for withholding doc changes >>> is >>> > null and void. >>> > >>> > "Best laid plans" and all that. >>> >>> This sounds like a job for a git hook. I pay fairly close attention to >>> emacs.devel for someone who isn't an Emacs dev, and apparently I >>> missed >>> this billboard. >> >> Not sure which billboard jou think you missed, but in general, I don't >> see here any problem for which a commit hook would be a good solution. >> The existing hooks are already annoying enough, and are too easy to >> bypass to be reliable. > > What I meant was: if 200 people have the ability to push to the repo, > but 50 of them aren't checking the mailing lists regularly, then you > call a halt to an RC, that's 50 people who don't know they shouldn't > push. It seems like a lot more work to chase after those 50 than to > close the gate and reject pushes to that particular release. I keep hitting C-c C-s (message-send) instead of C-x C-s (which would save a draft), which I hope will explain my slightly rude tone here.