Emacs 26.2 RC1 is out!

Emacs 26.2 RC1 is out!

[Nicolas Petton]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 680 bytes --]

Hi!

The first release candidate for what will be the 26.2 release of Emacs
(the extensible text editor) is available at

  https://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/pretest/emacs-26.2-rc1.tar.xz

or

  https://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/pretest/emacs-26.2-rc1.tar.gz

You can get the PGP signature at

  https://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/pretest/emacs-26.2-rc1.tar.xz.sig
  https://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/pretest/emacs-26.2-rc1.tar.gz.sig

Please give it as much testing as you can.

As always, if you encounter problems building or using Emacs,
send a report to bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org with full details
(if possible, use M-x report-emacs-bug).

Thanks for helping to test Emacs.

Cheers,
Nico

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 487 bytes --]

Re: Emacs 26.2 RC1 is out!

[Van L]

> Hi!
>

Hi, gpg2 says:

  XXX% gpg2 --verify emacs-26.2-rc1.tar.xz.sig
  gpg: assuming signed data in 'emacs-26.2-rc1.tar.xz'
  gpg: Signature made Thu 21 Mar 08:30:08 2019 AEDT
  gpg:                using RSA key D405AA2C862C54F17EEE6BE0E8BCD7866AFCF978
  gpg: Can't check signature: No public key
  
The result for verifying the file is different to the bottom at [1]

Following [2] next produces the note that the key has expired!

  XXX% gpg2 --verify --keyring ./gnu-keyring.gpg emacs-26.2-rc1.tar.xz.sig 
  gpg: assuming signed data in 'emacs-26.2-rc1.tar.xz'
  gpg: Signature made Thu 21 Mar 08:30:08 2019 AEDT
  gpg:                using RSA key D405AA2C862C54F17EEE6BE0E8BCD7866AFCF978
  gpg: Good signature from "Nicolas Petton <nicolas@petton.fr>" [unknown]
  gpg:                 aka "Nicolas Petton <petton.nicolas@gmail.com>" [unknown]
  gpg:                 aka "Nicolas Petton <nicolas@foretagsplatsen.se>" [unknown]
             ᘁ
  gpg: Note: This key has expired!
  Primary key fingerprint: 28D3 BED8 51FD F3AB 57FE  F93C 2335 87A4 7C20 7910
       Subkey fingerprint: D405 AA2C 862C 54F1 7EEE  6BE0 E8BC D786 6AFC F978

[1] https://www.gnupg.org/gph/en/manual/x135.html
[2] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/5701388/where-can-i-find-the-public-key-for-gnu-emacs

Re: Emacs 26.2 RC1 is out!

[Philippe Vaucher]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 389 bytes --]

>
> The first release candidate for what will be the 26.2 release of Emacs
> (the extensible text editor) is available at
>
>   https://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/pretest/emacs-26.2-rc1.tar.xz


Is there a branch or a tag on the repository reflecting this version? I
couldn't find any, sorry if I missed it.

I use tags or branches to build the corresponding docker images.

Thanks,
Philippe

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 777 bytes --]

Re: Emacs 26.2 RC1 is out!

[Nicolas Petton]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 477 bytes --]

Philippe Vaucher <philippe.vaucher@gmail.com> writes:

> Is there a branch or a tag on the repository reflecting this version? I
> couldn't find any, sorry if I missed it.

As it is a release candidate, the tarball contains some changes related
to the Emacs version being 26.2 and its release date (currently set to
the 27th) that should not be pushed yet.

I can push a tag with all committed changes, but the idea is that my
last commit could be tagged as the release.

Nico

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 487 bytes --]

Re: Emacs 26.2 RC1 is out!

[Nicolas Petton]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1379 bytes --]

Van L <van@scratch.space> writes:

> Hi, gpg2 says:

Hi!

>   XXX% gpg2 --verify emacs-26.2-rc1.tar.xz.sig
>   gpg: assuming signed data in 'emacs-26.2-rc1.tar.xz'
>   gpg: Signature made Thu 21 Mar 08:30:08 2019 AEDT
>   gpg:                using RSA key D405AA2C862C54F17EEE6BE0E8BCD7866AFCF978
>   gpg: Can't check signature: No public key
>   
> The result for verifying the file is different to the bottom at [1]
>
> Following [2] next produces the note that the key has expired!
>
>   XXX% gpg2 --verify --keyring ./gnu-keyring.gpg emacs-26.2-rc1.tar.xz.sig 
>   gpg: assuming signed data in 'emacs-26.2-rc1.tar.xz'
>   gpg: Signature made Thu 21 Mar 08:30:08 2019 AEDT
>   gpg:                using RSA key D405AA2C862C54F17EEE6BE0E8BCD7866AFCF978
>   gpg: Good signature from "Nicolas Petton <nicolas@petton.fr>" [unknown]
>   gpg:                 aka "Nicolas Petton <petton.nicolas@gmail.com>" [unknown]
>   gpg:                 aka "Nicolas Petton <nicolas@foretagsplatsen.se>" [unknown]
>              ᘁ
>   gpg: Note: This key has expired!
>   Primary key fingerprint: 28D3 BED8 51FD F3AB 57FE  F93C 2335 87A4 7C20 7910
>        Subkey fingerprint: D405 AA2C 862C 54F1 7EEE  6BE0 E8BC D786
>   6AFC F978

The key is not expired, it currently expires the 2020-01-02.  However,
the GNU keyring has apparently not been updated.

Nico

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 487 bytes --]

Re: Emacs 26.2 RC1 is out!

[Philippe Vaucher]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 496 bytes --]

>
> > Is there a branch or a tag on the repository reflecting this version? I
> > couldn't find any, sorry if I missed it.
>
> As it is a release candidate, the tarball contains some changes related
> to the Emacs version being 26.2 and its release date (currently set to
> the 27th) that should not be pushed yet.
>
> I can push a tag with all committed changes, but the idea is that my
> last commit could be tagged as the release.


Okay then I'll just wait for the release.

Thanks,
Philippe

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 778 bytes --]

Re: Emacs 26.2 RC1 is out!

[Andy Moreton]

On Thu 21 Mar 2019, Nicolas Petton wrote:

> Philippe Vaucher <philippe.vaucher@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Is there a branch or a tag on the repository reflecting this version? I
>> couldn't find any, sorry if I missed it.
>
> As it is a release candidate, the tarball contains some changes related
> to the Emacs version being 26.2 and its release date (currently set to
> the 27th) that should not be pushed yet.

A tarball for distribution should not contain anything that has not
been committed to version control.

If you have content that you do not want to appear (yet) on the release
branch, then make a branch for the release candidate, tag a commit on
that branch and the checkout that tag to build the tarball.

> I can push a tag with all committed changes, but the idea is that my
> last commit could be tagged as the release.

Tags are cheap, so there is no reason not to tag the -rc1 build in the
tree, and then tag the actual release later on. If both tags point at
the same commit that is not a problem.

    AndyM

Re: Emacs 26.2 RC1 is out!

[Óscar Fuentes]

Andy Moreton <andrewjmoreton@gmail.com> writes:

> On Thu 21 Mar 2019, Nicolas Petton wrote:
>
>> Philippe Vaucher <philippe.vaucher@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> Is there a branch or a tag on the repository reflecting this version? I
>>> couldn't find any, sorry if I missed it.
>>
>> As it is a release candidate, the tarball contains some changes related
>> to the Emacs version being 26.2 and its release date (currently set to
>> the 27th) that should not be pushed yet.
>
> A tarball for distribution should not contain anything that has not
> been committed to version control.

+1

> If you have content that you do not want to appear (yet) on the release
> branch, then make a branch for the release candidate, tag a commit on
> that branch and the checkout that tag to build the tarball.

+2

OTOH, it is very important to test the tarball itself. Those who check
out a tag from VC, build and test are doing useful work, but what they
are testing is not what is released.

Re: Emacs 26.2 RC1 is out!

[Nicolas Petton]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 668 bytes --]

Andy Moreton <andrewjmoreton@gmail.com> writes:

>> As it is a release candidate, the tarball contains some changes related
>> to the Emacs version being 26.2 and its release date (currently set to
>> the 27th) that should not be pushed yet.

I'm putting Glenn in Cc, I believe he wrote that part of the
documentation.

> A tarball for distribution should not contain anything that has not
> been committed to version control.

I agree with that, but it's not the current process as described in
admin/make-tarball.txt.  I'm fine with tagging RCs and pushing files
with unreleased version numbers, but then I will adjust the content of
make-tarball.txt.

Cheers,
Nico

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 487 bytes --]

Re: Emacs 26.2 RC1 is out!

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Nicolas Petton <nicolas@petton.fr>
> Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2019 21:50:14 +0100
> Cc: rgm@gnu.org
> 
> I'm putting Glenn in Cc, I believe he wrote that part of the
> documentation.
> 
> > A tarball for distribution should not contain anything that has not
> > been committed to version control.
> 
> I agree with that, but it's not the current process as described in
> admin/make-tarball.txt.  I'm fine with tagging RCs and pushing files
> with unreleased version numbers, but then I will adjust the content of
> make-tarball.txt.

Can you (or Glenn or someone else) describe what would need to be
changed in the docs, and what additional actions would have to be
made?

I don't think I mind RC tags in the repository, even if they
eventually point to the same commit as the release, but I'm not sure I
understand the details well enough.

Thanks.

Re: Emacs 26.2 RC1 is out!

[Nicolas Petton]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 816 bytes --]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

> Can you (or Glenn or someone else) describe what would need to be
> changed in the docs, and what additional actions would have to be
> made?

The doc says that it's best not to commit the files that change the
version number (to 26.2 in our case) and the release date (it's set to a
future date, and is subject to change).

If we change that process, the docs should say instead to make commit
those files, and make a tag, just like we do for pretests. 

> I don't think I mind RC tags in the repository, even if they
> eventually point to the same commit as the release, but I'm not sure I
> understand the details well enough.

The only issue is that we push files with a version number and release
date that is not final (if the RC has issues).

Nico

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 487 bytes --]

Re: Emacs 26.2 RC1 is out!

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Nicolas Petton <nicolas@petton.fr>
> Cc: andrewjmoreton@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, rgm@gnu.org
> Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2019 09:59:37 +0100
> 
> The doc says that it's best not to commit the files that change the
> version number (to 26.2 in our case) and the release date (it's set to a
> future date, and is subject to change).
> 
> If we change that process, the docs should say instead to make commit
> those files, and make a tag, just like we do for pretests. 
> 
> > I don't think I mind RC tags in the repository, even if they
> > eventually point to the same commit as the release, but I'm not sure I
> > understand the details well enough.
> 
> The only issue is that we push files with a version number and release
> date that is not final (if the RC has issues).

Thanks for the explanations.

Which are the affected files?

Re: Emacs 26.2 RC1 is out!

[Nicolas Petton]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 148 bytes --]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

> Which are the affected files?

README
configure.ac
etc/HISTORY
msdos/sed2v2.inp
nt/README.W32

Cheers,
Nico

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 487 bytes --]

Re: Emacs 26.2 RC1 is out!

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Nicolas Petton <nicolas@petton.fr>
> Cc: andrewjmoreton@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, rgm@gnu.org
> Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2019 10:37:15 +0100
> 
> > Which are the affected files?
> 
> README
> configure.ac
> etc/HISTORY
> msdos/sed2v2.inp
> nt/README.W32

Ah, okay.  So the problem is with having these say "26.2" whereas in
reality 26.2 might need more changes?  If so, it doesn't sound a big
problem to me, but I'd like to hear Glenn's opinion as well.

Thanks.

Re: Emacs 26.2 RC1 is out!

[Nicolas Petton]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 226 bytes --]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:


> Ah, okay.  So the problem is with having these say "26.2" whereas in
> reality 26.2 might need more changes?

That, and the HISTORY file contains a release date for 26.2 as well.

Nico

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 487 bytes --]

Re: Emacs 26.2 RC1 is out!

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Nicolas Petton <nicolas@petton.fr>
> Cc: andrewjmoreton@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, rgm@gnu.org
> Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2019 10:51:41 +0100
> 
> > Ah, okay.  So the problem is with having these say "26.2" whereas in
> > reality 26.2 might need more changes?
> 
> That, and the HISTORY file contains a release date for 26.2 as well.

It's the same problem.  Suppose we update HISTORY to the date of RC1.
If RC1 becomes Emacs 26.2, the date in HISTORY is correct; otherwise
we will commit a modified HISTORY with the release of the next RC.

Re: Emacs 26.2 RC1 is out!

[Philippe Vaucher]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 644 bytes --]

>
> > > Which are the affected files?
> >
> > README
> > configure.ac
> > etc/HISTORY
> > msdos/sed2v2.inp
> > nt/README.W32
>
> Ah, okay.  So the problem is with having these say "26.2" whereas in
> reality 26.2 might need more changes?  If so, it doesn't sound a big
> problem to me, but I'd like to hear Glenn's opinion as well.


Just a thought: why not name it 26.2-rc1 in these 26.2-rc1 commits (with a
26.2-rc1 tag)? Then when the final 26.2 is out, rename it to 26.2 and thus
when looking at these files you are always seeing the "latest released"
version.

Maybe that conflicts with other conventions tho, it's just an idea.

Philippe

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1089 bytes --]

Re: Emacs 26.2 RC1 is out!

[Philippe Vaucher]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 442 bytes --]

>
> > That, and the HISTORY file contains a release date for 26.2 as well.
>
> It's the same problem.  Suppose we update HISTORY to the date of RC1.
> If RC1 becomes Emacs 26.2, the date in HISTORY is correct; otherwise
> we will commit a modified HISTORY with the release of the next RC.
>

Just a note: with my proposal there is always a difference between 26.2-rc1
and 26.2 (the names), so the history date would change as well.

Philippe

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 696 bytes --]

Re: Emacs 26.2 RC1 is out!

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Philippe Vaucher <philippe.vaucher@gmail.com>
> Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2019 11:16:49 +0100
> Cc: Nicolas Petton <nicolas@petton.fr>, Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org>, andrewjmoreton@gmail.com, 
> 	Emacs developers <emacs-devel@gnu.org>
> 
>  > That, and the HISTORY file contains a release date for 26.2 as well.
> 
>  It's the same problem.  Suppose we update HISTORY to the date of RC1.
>  If RC1 becomes Emacs 26.2, the date in HISTORY is correct; otherwise
>  we will commit a modified HISTORY with the release of the next RC.
> 
> Just a note: with my proposal there is always a difference between 26.2-rc1 and 26.2 (the names), so the
> history date would change as well.

If there's a difference, then it isn't an RC.  A Release Candidate
means that if no significant problems are reported, the RC _becomes_
the official release, by just renaming the tarball without changing
its contents.

What you propose would be appropriate for a pretest, not for an RC.

Re: Emacs 26.2 RC1 is out!

[Nicolas Petton]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 367 bytes --]

Philippe Vaucher <philippe.vaucher@gmail.com> writes:

> Just a thought: why not name it 26.2-rc1 in these 26.2-rc1 commits (with a
> 26.2-rc1 tag)? Then when the final 26.2 is out, rename it to 26.2 and thus
> when looking at these files you are always seeing the "latest released"
> version.

Because the purpose of a RC is to be a potential release tarball.

Nico

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 487 bytes --]

Re: Emacs 26.2 RC1 is out!

[Philippe Vaucher]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 439 bytes --]

>
> > Just a note: with my proposal there is always a difference between
> 26.2-rc1 and 26.2 (the names), so the
> > history date would change as well.
>
> If there's a difference, then it isn't an RC.  A Release Candidate
> means that if no significant problems are reported, the RC _becomes_
> the official release, by just renaming the tarball without changing
> its contents.


Ah sorry, I didn't think this throught, you are correct.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 683 bytes --]

Re: Emacs 26.2 RC1 is out!

[Glenn Morris]

>> > Which are the affected files?
>> 
>> README
>> configure.ac
>> etc/HISTORY
>> msdos/sed2v2.inp
>> nt/README.W32

The instructions are probably unclear.
The intent was that you would M-x set-version, commit, tag, push.
It was just the HISTORY and ChangeLog file with the release notice that
would not be committed, in case the release date had to change.
It would not do any harm to commit those two files as well (ChangeLog is
no longer versioned, but those changes get committed as ChangeLog.3 or
whatever). It just creates a bit of churn if the release date ends up
changing, and obviously those files two don't affect the build in any
way, so personally I see no reason to commit them.

Testing from git is not the same as testing the release tarball, because
the tarball includes many generated files that certainly do affect the
build (configure, elc files, etc).

BTW, looks like none of the 26.2.x pretests (or RC) were tagged.
Since other changes have since been committed to emacs-26, but the
version number change wasn't, it's not really possible to tag the RC now.

Re: Emacs 26.2 RC1 is out!

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org>
> Cc: Nicolas Petton <nicolas@petton.fr>,  andrewjmoreton@gmail.com,  emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2019 12:39:44 -0400
> 
> The instructions are probably unclear.
> The intent was that you would M-x set-version, commit, tag, push.
> It was just the HISTORY and ChangeLog file with the release notice that
> would not be committed, in case the release date had to change.
> It would not do any harm to commit those two files as well (ChangeLog is
> no longer versioned, but those changes get committed as ChangeLog.3 or
> whatever). It just creates a bit of churn if the release date ends up
> changing, and obviously those files two don't affect the build in any
> way, so personally I see no reason to commit them.

OK, thanks.  So I guess we need to clarify the instructions.  Nicolas,
can you point out which part(s) is/are unclear in this regard?

> BTW, looks like none of the 26.2.x pretests (or RC) were tagged.

I see tags emacs-26.1.90, emacs-26.1.91, and emacs-26.1.92 on the
emacs-26 branch.  Or did you mean something else?

Re: Emacs 26.2 RC1 is out!

[Glenn Morris]

Eli Zaretskii wrote:

>> BTW, looks like none of the 26.2.x pretests (or RC) were tagged.
>
> I see tags emacs-26.1.90, emacs-26.1.91, and emacs-26.1.92 on the
> emacs-26 branch.  Or did you mean something else?

My mistake about the pretests not being tagged.

Re: Emacs 26.2 RC1 is out!

[Rostislav Svoboda]

> > I see tags emacs-26.1.90, emacs-26.1.91, and emacs-26.1.92 on the
> > emacs-26 branch.  Or did you mean something else?
>
> My mistake about the pretests not being tagged.

I just checked it and I can't see any 26.2 tag:
    $ git fetch --tags origin
    [..]
    $ git tag | grep 26.2
returns nothing. My `origin` configuration is:
    $ git config --list | grep origin
    remote.origin.url=https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/emacs.git
    remote.origin.fetch=+refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*
    branch.master.remote=origin

Am I doing something wrong? Thanks in advance for explanation.

Re: Emacs 26.2 RC1 is out!

[Eli Zaretskii]

On March 25, 2019 11:50:58 AM GMT+02:00, Rostislav Svoboda <rostislav.svoboda@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I see tags emacs-26.1.90, emacs-26.1.91, and emacs-26.1.92 on the
> > > emacs-26 branch.  Or did you mean something else?
> >
> > My mistake about the pretests not being tagged.
> 
> I just checked it and I can't see any 26.2 tag:
>     $ git fetch --tags origin
>     [..]
>     $ git tag | grep 26.2
> returns nothing. My `origin` configuration is:
>     $ git config --list | grep origin
>     remote.origin.url=https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/emacs.git
>     remote.origin.fetch=+refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*
>     branch.master.remote=origin
> 
> Am I doing something wrong? Thanks in advance for explanation.

No one said anything about 26.2 tag, I only said I see tags for 26.1.9x pretests.

Re: Emacs 26.2 RC1 is out!

[Nicolas Petton]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 258 bytes --]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

Hi Eli,

> OK, thanks.  So I guess we need to clarify the instructions.  Nicolas,
> can you point out which part(s) is/are unclear in this regard?

I will submit a patch for admin/make-tarball.txt here for review.

Nico

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 487 bytes --]