From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jon Cast Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: No calc in pretest? Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 15:05:31 -0500 Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <200207022005.g62K5Vg19108@d-ip-129-15-78-125.cs.ou.edu> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1025640348 14355 127.0.0.1 (2 Jul 2002 20:05:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 20:05:48 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Miles Bader , Stefan Monnier , Eli Zaretskii , storm@cua.dk, Emacs Devel Mailing List Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 17PTuF-0003jN-00 for ; Tue, 02 Jul 2002 22:05:47 +0200 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 17PTzQ-0003WG-00 for ; Tue, 02 Jul 2002 22:11:08 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 17PTuY-0000mB-00; Tue, 02 Jul 2002 16:06:06 -0400 Original-Received: from d-ip-129-15-78-125.cs.ou.edu ([129.15.78.125]) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 17PTuM-0000la-00; Tue, 02 Jul 2002 16:05:54 -0400 Original-Received: from ou.edu (jcast@localhost) by d-ip-129-15-78-125.cs.ou.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g62K5Vg19108; Tue, 2 Jul 2002 15:05:31 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: d-ip-129-15-78-125.cs.ou.edu: jcast owned process doing -bs Original-To: Simon Josefsson In-Reply-To: Message from Simon Josefsson of "Tue, 02 Jul 2002 18:09:16 +0200." Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:5347 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:5347 Simon Josefsson wrote: > Miles Bader writes: > > "Stefan Monnier" writes: > >> If it's more convenient to name the current trunk 22.0, then I > >> think it should be done. > > No one has presented a good reason why it would be more convenient > > either. > One reason is that we don't have to update :version fields and > documentation if there is a well defined versioning scheme. The following: x.y.0 is a release from head x.y.z (1 <= z < 50) is a bug-fix release x.y.z.90 (1 <= z < 50) is a bug-fix pre-test x.y.z (50 <= z < 70) is CVS x.y.z (70 <= z < 99) is a head pre-test is well-defined. Is that not sufficient for your purposes? > But there are major changes in CVS HEAD, that is the whole point of > calling it Emacs 22, which I think is a good idea. Releasing CVS > HEAD as 21.4 would be a mistake, as users would think "Pah, emacs > 21.4, I already have 21.2 and it works, I won't bother upgrading.". I don't think the changes that have been made are `major'. `Major' means something internally important; the changes between 21.3 and 21.4 are mostly external and either cosmetic or pure additions (i.e., everything in 21.1 is un-affected). There are `many' changes, but we expect that, right? > What is major and what isn't major is not something objectively > true. Many users probably don't care if Emacs uses MULE or Unicode > internally even though it is major work, and also many users regards > window transparency as something major altough it is little work. Well, not unless RMS says something is major or not. He's the maintainer, I think the determination of what is major should be left up to him. > Having faster development cycles has always been one of my gripes > with emacs, new features shouldn't have to wait 3-4 years. And calling the next release 22.0 fixes this how? Jon Cast