merge emacs-pretest-bug and emacs-devel

merge emacs-pretest-bug and emacs-devel

[Glenn Morris]

This has come up before at least once...

Given the way the pretest-bug list is being used, there is little
point having it. Indeed, it often causes extra work, with discussions
split on two lists.

When making emacs-pretest-bug an alias for emacs-devel was proposed in
March those who replied were in favour, but it never happened:

http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2007-03/msg00344.html
  From:     Richard Stallman
  Subject:  Emacs pretest bug reports
  Date:     Tue, 06 Mar 2007 17:36:33 -0500

RE: merge emacs-pretest-bug and emacs-devel

[Drew Adams]

> This has come up before at least once...
> Given the way the pretest-bug list is being used, there is little
> point having it. Indeed, it often causes extra work, with discussions
> split on two lists.
>
> When making emacs-pretest-bug an alias for emacs-devel was proposed in
> March those who replied were in favour, but it never happened:
>
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2007-03/msg00344.html
>   From:     Richard Stallman
>   Subject:  Emacs pretest bug reports
>   Date:     Tue, 06 Mar 2007 17:36:33 -0500

Not everyone who replied was in favor.  I, for one, am not.

I would prefer to separate most bug discussions from the rest of emacs-devel
discussion. If there were a merge to be made, I would prefer that it be
emacs-pretest with bug-gnu-emacs - but perhaps that could lead to confusion.

I might be a minority of one on this, however. You are right that most
people in the previous discussion were in favor of merging emacs-pretest
with emacs-devel.

RE: merge emacs-pretest-bug and emacs-devel

[Nick Roberts]

 > I would prefer to separate most bug discussions from the rest of emacs-devel
 > discussion. If there were a merge to be made, I would prefer that it be
 > emacs-pretest with bug-gnu-emacs - but perhaps that could lead to confusion.

Bug reports for a released version of Emacs, e.g., 22.1, should already take
place on bug-gnu-emacs.  It's ony bug reports for Emacs in CVS that should
go to emacs-pretest-bug, and these often turn into discussions about Emacs
development.

-- 
Nick                                           http://www.inet.net.nz/~nickrob

RE: merge emacs-pretest-bug and emacs-devel

[Drew Adams]

>  > I would prefer to separate most bug discussions from the rest
>  > of emacs-devel discussion. If there were a merge to be made,
>  > I would prefer that it be emacs-pretest with bug-gnu-emacs -
>  > but perhaps that could lead to confusion.
>
> Bug reports for a released version of Emacs, e.g., 22.1, should
> already take place on bug-gnu-emacs. It's ony bug reports for
> Emacs in CVS that should go to emacs-pretest-bug,

I realize that.

> and these often turn into discussions about Emacs development.

Not so often, IMO. And when they do, the thread can be moved to emacs-devel.

The same is true for discussions in bug-gnu-emacs and help-gnu-emacs:
Whenever a discussion turns into a discussion about development, emacs-devel
can be appropriate. It is not necessarily the case that a report to
emacs-pretest leads to a discussion about development.

However, as I said, based on the previous thread on this topic, I think most
people do not share my preference for separate lists for pre-release bugs
and development.

Re: merge emacs-pretest-bug and emacs-devel

[Richard Stallman]

I have no opinion about this question.

Re: merge emacs-pretest-bug and emacs-devel

[Glenn Morris]

Richard Stallman wrote:

> I have no opinion about this question.

Obviously you think the two lists are different because you persist in
forwarding bug reports from the bug list to the devel list. This is
annoying me no end, and is the main reason I am in favour of merging
the two. IMO, it is much easier if all information relating to a bug
is in a single thread, never mind on a single list. Secondarily, there
are those who report bugs direct to devel anyway.

I propose making emacs-pretest-bug an alias for emacs-devel in a week
or so, if there are no objections in that time. I don't know if it's
worth adding a [Bug] tag to messages that are forwarded in this way?

Leaving M-x report-emacs-bug alone will make it easier to change back
in the future, if needed.

RE: merge emacs-pretest-bug and emacs-devel

[Drew Adams]

> I propose making emacs-pretest-bug an alias for emacs-devel in a week
> or so, if there are no objections in that time.

Perhaps you mean no objections beyond the one I already voiced.

Just for the record. One is not many, but it is not zero either, so let's
not say there were no objections, when you carry out your proposal.

Re: merge emacs-pretest-bug and emacs-devel

[Richard Stallman]

    Obviously you think the two lists are different

They certainly ARE different, at present.  The question about which I
have no opinion is whether to merge them.

    I propose making emacs-pretest-bug an alias for emacs-devel in a week
    or so, if there are no objections in that time.

Ok, I will ask for that.

						    I don't know if it's
    worth adding a [Bug] tag to messages that are forwarded in this way?

I don't know if that is feasible; I also don't see why it would help.

Re: merge emacs-pretest-bug and emacs-devel

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org>
> Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2007 23:23:09 -0400
> Cc: Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
> I propose making emacs-pretest-bug an alias for emacs-devel in a week
> or so, if there are no objections in that time.

If we do that, what will happen to the archives of emacs-pretest-bug,
both before and after the merge?

Re: merge emacs-pretest-bug and emacs-devel

[Glenn Morris]

Eli Zaretskii wrote:

> If we do that, what will happen to the archives of
> emacs-pretest-bug, both before and after the merge?

I don't think anything should or would happen to the pre-merge
archives.

I don't really know the answer to the "after" part of your question;
but I expect that if the change is done by a mail alias (the easiest
way, AFAIK), then no more mails will appear in the e-p-b archives from
that point on. If it's possible to get the mailman software to do the
forwarding instead, then we could still archive things in e-p-b,
before forwarding them on to e-d. This might be nice (though people
would probably use e-p-b less than before).

Re: merge emacs-pretest-bug and emacs-devel

[Glenn Morris]

Richard Stallman wrote:

>    I don't know if it's worth adding a [Bug] tag to messages that
>    are forwarded in this way?
>
> I don't know if that is feasible; I also don't see why it would help.

Just a thought, in case people wanted to easy way to distinguish
things that came in as bug reports via e-p-b. I guess a mail alias
could not do this, but a procmail (or whatever) rule could.

Re: merge emacs-pretest-bug and emacs-devel

[Glenn Morris]

"Drew Adams" wrote:

>> I propose making emacs-pretest-bug an alias for emacs-devel in a week
>> or so, if there are no objections in that time.
>
> Perhaps you mean no objections beyond the one I already voiced.

I really meant no objections from Emacs developers and bug fixers.

RE: merge emacs-pretest-bug and emacs-devel

[Drew Adams]

> >> I propose making emacs-pretest-bug an alias for emacs-devel in a week
> >> or so, if there are no objections in that time.
> >
> > Perhaps you mean no objections beyond the one I already voiced.
>
> I really meant no objections from Emacs developers and bug fixers.

That includes me, even if my developments and fixes are not equal to yours.
Are you going to set the bar by counting change-log entries?

And since when should the opinion of an non-developer, non-bug-fixer not
count? For this question, the opinion of anyone subscribed to either mailing
list is relevant.

Re: merge emacs-pretest-bug and emacs-devel

[Ken Manheimer]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 463 bytes --]

On 8/11/07, Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org> wrote:

> I propose making emacs-pretest-bug an alias for emacs-devel in a week
> or so, if there are no objections in that time. I don't know if it's
> worth adding a [Bug] tag to messages that are forwarded in this way?


whether or not it's easily doable, i think adding a [Bug] tag to messages
submitted via emacs-pretest-bug would only muddy the waters.  i would
suggest not doing that.

-- 
ken
http://myriadicity.net

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 804 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 142 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Emacs-devel mailing list
Emacs-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel

Re: merge emacs-pretest-bug and emacs-devel

[Reiner Steib]

On Sun, Aug 12 2007, Glenn Morris wrote:

> I don't know if it's worth adding a [Bug] tag to messages that are
> forwarded in this way?
>
> Leaving M-x report-emacs-bug alone will make it easier to change back
> in the future, if needed.

`TeX-submit-bug-report' (AUCTeX) and `report-emacs-bug' in XEmacs add the
version number to the subject:

| 11.84; Some AUCTeX bug
| [Bug: 21.5-b27] Some XEmacs bug

This might be useful for Emacs as well (for 22.2+) because it
immediately shows the version / branch information (I'm not sure if
the trunk, unicode and multi-tty have different version numbers at
present; probably they should.).

IIRC, we use "nn.mm;" instead of "[nn.mm]" because the later might get
stripped by mailing software (stripping list identifiers).

I agree that we should keep the different mail addresses in
`report-emacs-bug'.

Bye, Reiner.
-- 
       ,,,
      (o o)
---ooO-(_)-Ooo---  |  PGP key available  |  http://rsteib.home.pages.de/

Re: merge emacs-pretest-bug and emacs-devel

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org>
> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 03:39:07 -0400
> 
> Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> 
> > If we do that, what will happen to the archives of
> > emacs-pretest-bug, both before and after the merge?
> 
> I don't think anything should or would happen to the pre-merge
> archives.

Then we will need some kind of comment in the archives of emacs-devel
that, before such-and-such date, messages could be in a different
place.  Otherwise, people will fail to find past bug reports a few
years from now.

> I don't really know the answer to the "after" part of your question;
> but I expect that if the change is done by a mail alias (the easiest
> way, AFAIK), then no more mails will appear in the e-p-b archives from
> that point on. If it's possible to get the mailman software to do the
> forwarding instead, then we could still archive things in e-p-b,
> before forwarding them on to e-d. This might be nice (though people
> would probably use e-p-b less than before).

I don't know enough about mailman (does it even support mail
aliases?), but this must be figured out before we merge, IMO.

Re: merge emacs-pretest-bug and emacs-devel

[Glenn Morris]

Eli Zaretskii wrote:

> I don't know enough about mailman (does it even support mail
> aliases?), but this must be figured out before we merge, IMO.

After looking a bit, I don't see any sane way to do it using mailman.
One could subscribe emacs-devel to e-p-b, but that way lies madness.
So I guess it will be done as a simple mail alias, and no more mails
will appear in the e-p-b archive from then on.

Re: merge emacs-pretest-bug and emacs-devel

[Richard Stallman]

    `TeX-submit-bug-report' (AUCTeX) and `report-emacs-bug' in XEmacs add the
    version number to the subject:

    | 11.84; Some AUCTeX bug
    | [Bug: 21.5-b27] Some XEmacs bug

    This might be useful for Emacs as well (for 22.2+) because it
    immediately shows the version / branch information (I'm not sure if
    the trunk, unicode and multi-tty have different version numbers at
    present; probably they should.).

It's a good ides a.  Would someone please do that?

Re: merge emacs-pretest-bug and emacs-devel

[Michaël Cadilhac]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 967 bytes --]

Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:

>     `TeX-submit-bug-report' (AUCTeX) and `report-emacs-bug' in XEmacs add the
>     version number to the subject:
>
>     | 11.84; Some AUCTeX bug
>     | [Bug: 21.5-b27] Some XEmacs bug
>
>     This might be useful for Emacs as well (for 22.2+) because it
>     immediately shows the version / branch information (I'm not sure if
>     the trunk, unicode and multi-tty have different version numbers at
>     present; probably they should.).
>
> It's a good ides a.  Would someone please do that?

Ok, I volunteer for this small task :-) ...to start getting back in the
loop ;-)

-- 
 |   Michaël `Micha' Cadilhac       |    This .sig has been generated        |
 |   http://michael.cadilhac.name   |         by Outlook Express 98          |
 |   JID/MSN:                       |    and triple-checked on               |
 `----  michael.cadilhac@gmail.com  |         Windows Mail Vista.       -  --'

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 188 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 142 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Emacs-devel mailing list
Emacs-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel

Re: merge emacs-pretest-bug and emacs-devel

[Richard Stallman]

emacs-protest-bug has been redirected to emacs-devel.  The old
archives of emacs-protest-bug should still be available.

Re: merge emacs-pretest-bug and emacs-devel

[David Kastrup]

Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:

> emacs-protest-bug has been redirected to emacs-devel.  The old
> archives of emacs-protest-bug should still be available.

"emacs-protest-bug"?  Is that the list where Emacs bugs protest
against getting fixed?

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: merge emacs-pretest-bug and emacs-devel

[Michaël Cadilhac]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1118 bytes --]

michael@cadilhac.name (Michaël Cadilhac) writes:

> Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:
>
>>     `TeX-submit-bug-report' (AUCTeX) and `report-emacs-bug' in XEmacs add the
>>     version number to the subject:
>>
>>     | 11.84; Some AUCTeX bug
>>     | [Bug: 21.5-b27] Some XEmacs bug
>>
>>     This might be useful for Emacs as well (for 22.2+) because it
>>     immediately shows the version / branch information (I'm not sure if
>>     the trunk, unicode and multi-tty have different version numbers at
>>     present; probably they should.).
>>
>> It's a good ides a.  Would someone please do that?
>
> Ok, I volunteer for this small task :-) ...to start getting back in the
> loop ;-)

Done. Hope the format (« Bug: 22.1.50.1; Bug test. ») pleases everyone. :-)

-- 
 |   Michaël `Micha' Cadilhac       |  «Tu aimeras ton prochain.»            |
 |   http://michael.cadilhac.name   |    D'abord, Dieu ou pas,               |
 |   JID/MSN:                       |       j'ai horreur qu'on me tutoie.    |
 `----  michael.cadilhac@gmail.com  |           -- P. Desproges         -  --'

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 188 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 142 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Emacs-devel mailing list
Emacs-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel

Re: merge emacs-pretest-bug and emacs-devel

[Reiner Steib]

On Wed, Aug 15 2007, Michaël Cadilhac wrote:

>>>     | 11.84; Some AUCTeX bug
>>>     | [Bug: 21.5-b27] Some XEmacs bug
[...]
> Hope the format (« Bug: 22.1.50.1; Bug test. ») pleases
> everyone. :-)

I'd slightly prefer the AUCTeX variant (omit "Bug: ") and skip the
built version (".1").

Bye, Reiner.
-- 
       ,,,
      (o o)
---ooO-(_)-Ooo---  |  PGP key available  |  http://rsteib.home.pages.de/

Re: merge emacs-pretest-bug and emacs-devel

[Juri Linkov]

>> emacs-protest-bug has been redirected to emacs-devel.  The old
>> archives of emacs-protest-bug should still be available.
>
> "emacs-protest-bug"?  Is that the list where Emacs bugs protest
> against getting fixed?

Bug reports are protests against bugs in Emacs.

-- 
Juri Linkov
http://www.jurta.org/emacs/

Re: merge emacs-pretest-bug and emacs-devel

[Michaël Cadilhac]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1549 bytes --]

Reiner Steib <reinersteib+gmane@imap.cc> writes:

> On Wed, Aug 15 2007, Michaël Cadilhac wrote:
>
>>>>     | 11.84; Some AUCTeX bug
>>>>     | [Bug: 21.5-b27] Some XEmacs bug
> [...]
>> Hope the format (« Bug: 22.1.50.1; Bug test. ») pleases
>> everyone. :-)
>
> I'd slightly prefer the AUCTeX variant (omit "Bug: ") and skip the
> built version (".1").

At first sight, having the subject starting with numbers seemed quite
disturbing to me.  But you're right, the lesser the better.

So we're going for something like

  (string-match "^\\(\\([.0-9]+\\)*\\)\\.[0-9]+$" emacs-version)
  (setq topic (concat (match-string 1 emacs-version) "; " topic))

Question: do I have to make a special case for MS-DOS?  This would be
because loadup.el does not seem to compute the same emacs-version for
MS-DOS:

;; Determine which last version number to use
;; based on the executables that now exist.
(if (and (or (equal (nth 3 command-line-args) "dump")
             (equal (nth 4 command-line-args) "dump"))
         (not (eq system-type 'ms-dos)))
      [...]
      (defconst emacs-version
        (format "%s.%d"
                emacs-version (if versions (1+ (apply 'max versions)) 1)))))


-- 
 |   Michaël `Micha' Cadilhac       |  Le docteur : Je panse donc j'essuie,  |
 |   http://michael.cadilhac.name   |  Le voleur aillant trop avoué :        |
 |   JID/MSN:                       |     J'épenche donc je fuis.            |
 `----  michael.cadilhac@gmail.com  |                                   -  --'

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 188 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 142 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Emacs-devel mailing list
Emacs-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel

Re: merge emacs-pretest-bug and emacs-devel

[David Kastrup]

Juri Linkov <juri@jurta.org> writes:

>>> emacs-protest-bug has been redirected to emacs-devel.  The old
>>> archives of emacs-protest-bug should still be available.
>>
>> "emacs-protest-bug"?  Is that the list where Emacs bugs protest
>> against getting fixed?
>
> Bug reports are protests against bugs in Emacs.

Well, every bug has a cause, so I assumed that they would make for
natural protestors.

Perhaps we should start making protest releases before doing a fall
release.

-- 
David Kastrup

Re: merge emacs-pretest-bug and emacs-devel

[Richard Stallman]

    > emacs-protest-bug has been redirected to emacs-devel.  The old
    > archives of emacs-protest-bug should still be available.

    "emacs-protest-bug"?  Is that the list where Emacs bugs protest
    against getting fixed?

No, it's where I protest the fact that you people aren't fixing them ;-).

Re: merge emacs-pretest-bug and emacs-devel

[Michaël Cadilhac]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1166 bytes --]

michael@cadilhac.name (Michaël Cadilhac) writes:

> At first sight, having the subject starting with numbers seemed quite
> disturbing to me.  But you're right, the lesser the better.
>
> So we're going for something like
>
>   (string-match "^\\(\\([.0-9]+\\)*\\)\\.[0-9]+$" emacs-version)
>   (setq topic (concat (match-string 1 emacs-version) "; " topic))

Ok, another point for the removal of ``Bug'' :

RMS said:

>>						    I don't know if it's
>>    worth adding a [Bug] tag to messages that are forwarded in this way?
>
> I don't know if that is feasible; I also don't see why it would help.

> Question: do I have to make a special case for MS-DOS?

I suppose it's not important.  I'll do like Gnus does in
`gnus-emacs-version', that is to say (outch, never try to acronymize
everything) nothing special.

-- 
 |   Michaël `Micha' Cadilhac       |  (\(\  This is the cute bunny virus,   |
 |   http://michael.cadilhac.name   |  (^.^)  please copy this into your     |
 |   JID/MSN:                       |  (")")  sig so it can spread.          |
 `----  michael.cadilhac@gmail.com  |                                   -  --'

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 188 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 142 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Emacs-devel mailing list
Emacs-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel

Re: merge emacs-pretest-bug and emacs-devel

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: michael@cadilhac.name (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Micha=EBl?= Cadilhac)
> Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 11:12:46 +0200
> 
> > Question: do I have to make a special case for MS-DOS?
> 
> I suppose it's not important.

?? Why not?

Anyway, emacs-version on MS-DOS has only 2 parts, so if you make the
last part optional in the regexp, it will do for all platforms.

Re: merge emacs-pretest-bug and emacs-devel

[Michaël Cadilhac]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1305 bytes --]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> From: michael@cadilhac.name (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Micha=EBl?= Cadilhac)
>> Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 11:12:46 +0200
>> 
>> > Question: do I have to make a special case for MS-DOS?
>> 
>> I suppose it's not important.
>
> ?? Why not?

Because nobody replied :-) Because Gnus doesn't make a special case.
And because I don't see any special case in :

(defun report-emacs-bug (topic &optional recent-keys)
  [...]
  ;; If there are four numbers in emacs-version, this is a pretest
  ;; version.
  (let* ((pretest-p (string-match "\\..*\\..*\\." emacs-version))

IIUC, pretest on MS-DOS should have 3 numbers, nop ?

> Anyway, emacs-version on MS-DOS has only 2 parts, so if you make the
> last part optional in the regexp, it will do for all platforms.

Well, I don't really see what you mean. IIUC :
- MS-DOS : 22.1
- MS-DOS pretest : 22.1.50
- Linux : 22.1.42
- Linux pretest : 22.1.50.42

What do I have missed ?

-- 
 |   Michaël `Micha' Cadilhac       |  La meilleure façon                    |
 |   http://michael.cadilhac.name   |     de ne pas avancer,                 |
 |   JID/MSN:                       |  c'est de suivre une idée fixe.        |
 `----  michael.cadilhac@gmail.com  |          -- Jacques Prévert       -  --'

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 188 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 142 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Emacs-devel mailing list
Emacs-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel

Re: merge emacs-pretest-bug and emacs-devel

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: michael@cadilhac.name (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Micha=EBl?= Cadilhac)
> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 13:41:46 +0200
> 
> >> I suppose it's not important.
> >
> > ?? Why not?
> 
> Because nobody replied :-)

Yeah, and you waited the whole two days!  Geez, can't those bozos
reply right away?

> IIUC, pretest on MS-DOS should have 3 numbers, no?

Yes.

> > Anyway, emacs-version on MS-DOS has only 2 parts, so if you make the
> > last part optional in the regexp, it will do for all platforms.
> 
> Well, I don't really see what you mean. IIUC:
>  MS-DOS: 22.1
>  MS-DOS pretest: 22.1.50
>  Linux: 22.1.42
>  Linux pretest: 22.1.50.42
> 
> What do I have missed?

I don't know.  I didn't track this longish discussion.  If you can
explain what you are trying to do with emacs-version, and why you are
bothered by how many parts it has, I could try helping you.

Re: merge emacs-pretest-bug and emacs-devel

[Michaël Cadilhac]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1230 bytes --]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> From: michael@cadilhac.name (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Micha=EBl?= Cadilhac)
>> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
>> Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 13:41:46 +0200
>> 
>> >> I suppose it's not important.
>> >
>> > ?? Why not?
>> 
>> Because nobody replied :-)
>
> Yeah, and you waited the whole two days!  Geez, can't those bozos
> reply right away?

Where are those guys using Emacs on MS-DOS hiding, anyway ? :-P  (He,
mind the smileys !)

> I didn't track this longish discussion.  If you can explain what you
> are trying to do with emacs-version, and why you are bothered by how
> many parts it has, I could try helping you.

I just have to prefix `topic' by the emacs-version, with build number
stripped.

So IIUC, I should make MS-DOS a special case, for both the prefixing and
`pretest-p', the predicate set to t if there are 4 numbers in
`emacs-version'.

-- 
 |   Michaël `Micha' Cadilhac       |  Would someone please DTRT with this,  |
 |   http://michael.cadilhac.name   |        then ACK?                       |
 |   JID/MSN:                       |          -- Richard Stallman           |
 `----  michael.cadilhac@gmail.com  |                                   -  --'

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 188 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 142 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Emacs-devel mailing list
Emacs-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel

Re: merge emacs-pretest-bug and emacs-devel

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: michael@cadilhac.name (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Micha=EBl?= Cadilhac)
> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 14:55:56 +0200
> 
> I just have to prefix `topic' by the emacs-version, with build number
> stripped.

What would that `topic' be, and why does it care whether the version
is a pretest or not?

> So IIUC, I should make MS-DOS a special case, for both the prefixing and
> `pretest-p', the predicate set to t if there are 4 numbers in
> `emacs-version'.

Yes, I think so.

Re: merge emacs-pretest-bug and emacs-devel

[Michaël Cadilhac]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 975 bytes --]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> From: michael@cadilhac.name (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Micha=EBl?= Cadilhac)
>> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
>> Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 14:55:56 +0200
>> 
>> I just have to prefix `topic' by the emacs-version, with build number
>> stripped.
>
> What would that `topic' be, and why does it care whether the version
> is a pretest or not?

Subject: 22.1; Bug on a release.
Subject: 22.1.50; Bug on a pretest.

And I don't really want:
Subject: 22; Bug on a release on MS-DOS.
Subject: 22.1; Bug on a pretest on MS-DOS.

Though I don't know if anybody has ever managed to send a bug report
From MS-DOS :-)

-- 
 |   Michaël `Micha' Cadilhac       |  Libertude,                            |
 |   http://michael.cadilhac.name   |        Égalitude,                      |
 |   JID/MSN:                       |             Fraternitude.              |
 `----  michael.cadilhac@gmail.com  |          -- À peu près S.R.       -  --'

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 188 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 142 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Emacs-devel mailing list
Emacs-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel

Re: merge emacs-pretest-bug and emacs-devel

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: michael@cadilhac.name (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Micha=EBl?= Cadilhac)
> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 15:29:25 +0200
> 
> > What would that `topic' be, and why does it care whether the version
> > is a pretest or not?
> 
> Subject: 22.1; Bug on a release.
> Subject: 22.1.50; Bug on a pretest.
> 
> And I don't really want:
> Subject: 22; Bug on a release on MS-DOS.
> Subject: 22.1; Bug on a pretest on MS-DOS.

Then on MS-DOS, you should not remove the part after the last period.
That should do the trick.