From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Miles Bader Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [jerome.marant@free.fr: Re: Possible help with stable Emacs releases.] Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 10:32:41 -0400 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Message-ID: <20040930143241.GA2296@fencepost> References: <1096291271.415813c757a26@imp6-q.free.fr> <20040927134714.GA20012@fencepost> <87hdphx91c.fsf@trouble.defaultvalue.org> <87655wswkv.fsf@trouble.defaultvalue.org> <1096489325.415b196d95987@imp3-q.free.fr> <200409300053.i8U0rWh20758@raven.dms.auburn.edu> <01c4a6f7$Blat.v2.2.2$8c5c2b00@zahav.net.il> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1096554799 11982 80.91.229.6 (30 Sep 2004 14:33:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 14:33:19 +0000 (UTC) Cc: jerome.marant@free.fr, emacs-devel@gnu.org, rlb@defaultvalue.org, storm@cua.dk Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Sep 30 16:33:07 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1CD1zW-0005ed-00 for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 16:33:07 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CD25u-0007Te-O6 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 10:39:42 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CD25c-0007OC-Ag for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 10:39:24 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CD25b-0007Ns-IV for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 10:39:23 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CD25b-0007Nc-8u for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 10:39:23 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CD1z8-0000no-KB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 10:32:42 -0400 Original-Received: from miles by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.34) id 1CD1z7-00014t-Co; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 10:32:41 -0400 Original-To: Eli Zaretskii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <01c4a6f7$Blat.v2.2.2$8c5c2b00@zahav.net.il> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i Blat: Foop X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:27705 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:27705 On Thu, Sep 30, 2004 at 04:11:38PM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > Anyway, what's wrong with the current scheme that we need to abandon > it Because the current scheme is confusing to users. I've certainly observed doubt as to whether a new Emacs release "means anything" (i.e. lots of new features, or just a few random fixes) or not. > and how does the suggested 3-component scheme improves that to a > degree that justifies additional work (to fix all those places that > will need fixing)? What work? I saw a similar claim earlier in this thread, grepped around a bit, and saw no places that seemed to care what the version looks like. No doubt there are a few places like the maintenance scripts in admin, but frankly if it's _only_ that, it's a silly objection -- there's certainly somebody willing to fix those up. Lisp packages are really the place that matters, and as I mentioned, I've seen absolutely no evidence that such a change would have any adverse impact at all. I think the suggestion that a third-level component >= 50 mean "development" is a very reasonable idea to retain that distinction, and in general following Rob's would seem to result in something that's a lot less clunky than the current system. -Miles -- I'm beginning to think that life is just one long Yoko Ono album; no rhyme or reason, just a lot of incoherent shrieks and then it's over. --Ian Wolff