From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ihor Radchenko Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: New Package for NonGNU-ELPA: clojure-ts-mode Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2023 12:52:54 +0000 Message-ID: <87wmxbs7a1.fsf@localhost> References: <87il9kksqz.fsf@dfreeman.email> <87a5udk1co.fsf@posteo.net> <835y51kslv.fsf@gnu.org> <7a82c524-1aa1-e755-e377-673ebb107a44@gutov.dev> <83r0nok8s4.fsf@gnu.org> <87il90znco.fsf@yahoo.com> <1977fbef-307b-bcf4-9448-64f26916dd65@gutov.dev> <87edjozlqq.fsf@yahoo.com> <43ddad10-49dd-1c49-ebfe-51689780b315@gutov.dev> <83jztgk410.fsf@gnu.org> <83edjojx8c.fsf@gnu.org> <8734zzv7vk.fsf@localhost> <83edjjecmx.fsf@gnu.org> <87wmxbtsd4.fsf@localhost> <83bkeneb8j.fsf@gnu.org> <87ledrtqzx.fsf@localhost> <87a5u7sal0.fsf@yahoo.com> <87bkento99.fsf@localhost> <871qfjs855.fsf@yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="24201"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Eli Zaretskii , stefankangas@gmail.com, dmitry@gutov.dev, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Po Lu Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Aug 31 14:52:54 2023 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1qbhAL-00061P-TG for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 31 Aug 2023 14:52:53 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qbhA7-0005m5-4M; Thu, 31 Aug 2023 08:52:40 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qbhA2-0005lf-61 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 31 Aug 2023 08:52:34 -0400 Original-Received: from mout02.posteo.de ([185.67.36.66]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qbh9x-0003Xb-UW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 31 Aug 2023 08:52:33 -0400 Original-Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout02.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 66552240101 for ; Thu, 31 Aug 2023 14:52:21 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1693486341; bh=IlQg75qQkLkwJAjjP//4DVLRVWTQtZeJsHMUX6v8ze0=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:From; b=gX4GryIUtYIf7GvbZbt6rCbQvUK0C7mhJLYiXrv0AeBbDJLWmRMazcHXJc5VHPLRG 3pJmNFncjW9Fd84hFasm4UqKsTEUZLibfUsmXJQyvcwj+DS5dVrNBLg0jG4zBz70Go /f5ZtLJ6TCUiKFt0tfSNqRzWxVxBJ+2QHTZ3q8iwZqhZ6d7SWA9DKlnJzBKScMr01D /3JJUmjTRS+cubD4zrIWs8O874LycWJqxXQF48oJ13Sl6JUyMb1B/50AwZP/kpBMi4 0GX/OWt2N24UfKdBwoLPg02AYp/6L3u7XzcAJ8V/z4FqxXOEbzpgb6MlsSVKrWkPwf HY5ieMaJpO98w== Original-Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4Rc1K027Glz6tw6; Thu, 31 Aug 2023 14:52:19 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <871qfjs855.fsf@yahoo.com> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.67.36.66; envelope-from=yantar92@posteo.net; helo=mout02.posteo.de X-Spam_score_int: -43 X-Spam_score: -4.4 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:309645 Archived-At: Po Lu writes: > Ihor Radchenko writes: > >> May you elaborate about thorough testing? > > If tarballs are released too frequently, users will never test a single > tarball to the degree necessary for confidence to be vested in their > reliability. Our (already desultory) testing effort will quickly fall > into disarray, where everyone will be testing not one tarball, but one > of many dozens. These tarballs will be mostly the same, as they will only differ by bugfixes. So, testing different "bugfix" tarball versions will only risk differing via some bugs being already fixed in newer versions. The worst-case scenario is when some bugfix introduces another bug, but AFAIK it is already ensured that such things almost never happen. So, I do not think that having multiple bugfix versions around will pose a significant problem. -- Ihor Radchenko // yantar92, Org mode contributor, Learn more about Org mode at . Support Org development at , or support my work at