From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Change in rmail-insert-mime-forwarded-message Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 18:07:24 +0200 Message-ID: <83a9saqvk3.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87d2xb64zc.fsf@foil.strangled.net> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1358266032 3384 80.91.229.3 (15 Jan 2013 16:07:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 16:07:12 +0000 (UTC) Cc: mdl@alum.mit.edu, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jan 15 17:07:30 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Tv92o-0001jz-Ma for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 15 Jan 2013 17:07:22 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:52111 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Tv92X-0001wk-St for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 15 Jan 2013 11:07:05 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:50458) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Tv92U-0001wN-HV for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Jan 2013 11:07:04 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Tv92T-00017o-0b for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Jan 2013 11:07:02 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il ([80.179.55.172]:57187) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Tv92S-00017M-OD; Tue, 15 Jan 2013 11:07:00 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0MGO00400CP1LM00@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Tue, 15 Jan 2013 18:06:51 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0MGO004KVCRFK120@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Tue, 15 Jan 2013 18:06:51 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 X-Received-From: 80.179.55.172 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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 Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:156384 Archived-At: > Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 00:27:12 -0500 > From: Richard Stallman > CC: mdl@alum.mit.edu, eliz@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org > > So, what, if anything, should be done about this in the emacs-24 branch > (ie for the 24.3 release)? > > Is the change that caused the bug included in the 24.3 release? Yes. > My inclination is not to backport the subsequent trunk rmail changes to > emacs-24 at this stage, but to revert the 2012-12-29 rmailmm change in > emacs-24 (only). Then at least 24.3 will be no worse than 24.1,2, and > the new stuff can get more testing in trunk. > > I am surprised this change was put into the release at such a late > date. It did not fix a regression. It was a very simple fix, and my testing have clearly shown that it does TRT. > I think reverting it in the release is right. 'f' in Rmail was dysfunctional before this fix; it will be dysfunctional again, if the change is reverted without fixing it in some other way.