From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: EOL conversion of files in .tar archives Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 23:20:49 +0200 Message-ID: <85646kbln2.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> References: <87hcq5bx8k.fsf@stupidchicken.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1179868871 17065 80.91.229.12 (22 May 2007 21:21:11 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 21:21:11 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Chong Yidong , emacs-devel@gnu.org, eliz@gnu.org, handa@m17n.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue May 22 23:21:06 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Hqbn0-00054o-B0 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 22 May 2007 23:21:06 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Hqbn1-0004Rs-Bt for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 22 May 2007 17:21:07 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Hqbmw-0004OR-Lx for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 May 2007 17:21:02 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Hqbmu-0004Ka-Rb for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 May 2007 17:21:01 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Hqbmu-0004KI-L4 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 May 2007 17:21:00 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-in-10.arcor-online.net ([151.189.21.50]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Hqbmm-00011Q-HU; Tue, 22 May 2007 17:20:52 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-in-01-z2.arcor-online.net (mail-in-01-z2.arcor-online.net [151.189.8.13]) by mail-in-10.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13BF51F5529; Tue, 22 May 2007 23:20:51 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from mail-in-06.arcor-online.net (mail-in-06.arcor-online.net [151.189.21.46]) by mail-in-01-z2.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0512312DFDF; Tue, 22 May 2007 23:20:51 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from lola.goethe.zz (dslb-084-061-062-098.pools.arcor-ip.net [84.61.62.98]) by mail-in-06.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D56253664C6; Tue, 22 May 2007 23:20:50 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: by lola.goethe.zz (Postfix, from userid 1002) id DF4F71C4CE33; Tue, 22 May 2007 23:20:49 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Tue\, 22 May 2007 10\:52\:37 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.4-2.6 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: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:71632 Archived-At: Richard Stallman writes: > Why? This behavior has been present since before the pretest, and no > one complained; this suggests it is not urgent. > > Just because the pretesters didn't see a bug during 6 months > doesn't mean it isn't a serious bug. Quite so. However, Emacs is _huge_ and growing. If we won't release it as long as there is any serious bug remaining in any subsystem of it, we might as well strike "release" off the things we are ever going to consider. With a system as large and complex as Emacs, there is no chance we'll _ever_ see a release if we don't cut off the attempts of fixing things at one point of time. We _have_ to raise the threshold of severity for bugs we even _attempt_ to fix for the release in order to have the amount of fixes causing potential havoc (and thus requiring an extension of the release schedule with additional pretests) shrink. It will be a huge coincidence (with no really important correlation to the actual amount of severe bugs remaining) if there will be no serious bug being _reported_ in any of the many subsystems of Emacs for an extended period of time. And that means, serious bugs remaining or not, that pretty much every point of time is as good for a release as the next one. In fact, I would say that we are currently drifting away from the optimal time for a release since the attention span for last-minute fixes is pretty much over. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum