Emacs 24.5 second release candidate

Emacs 24.5 second release candidate

[Nicolas Petton]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 407 bytes --]

The second release candidate for the 24.5 release of Emacs (the
extensible text editor) is available at

  ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/pretest/emacs-24.5-rc2.tar.xz

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.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 512 bytes --]

Re: Emacs 24.5 second release candidate

[Glenn Morris]

Trivia:
You need to fix the Changelog entries. Remove all the old "24.5
released" entries, and add new ones with the correct (anticipated) date.

Also, I thought the decision was not to include Jan's 2015-03-29
changes, but perhaps that no longer applies.

Re: Emacs 24.5 second release candidate

[Stefan Monnier]

> changes, but perhaps that no longer applies.

Indeed, that no longer applies,


        Stefan

Re: Emacs 24.5 second release candidate

[Nicolas Petton]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 320 bytes --]


Glenn Morris writes:

> Trivia:
> You need to fix the Changelog entries. Remove all the old "24.5
> released" entries, and add new ones with the correct (anticipated)
> date.

Oh, thanks for double-checking.  Is it ok to just update the tarball?

Cheers,
Nico
-- 
Nicolas Petton
http://nicolas-petton.fr

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 512 bytes --]

Re: Emacs 24.5 second release candidate

[Nicolas Petton]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 586 bytes --]


Nicolas Petton writes:

> Glenn Morris writes:
>
>> Trivia:
>> You need to fix the Changelog entries. Remove all the old "24.5
>> released" entries, and add new ones with the correct (anticipated)
>> date.
>
> Oh, thanks for double-checking.  Is it ok to just update the tarball?

Now that I think about it, the RC2 has already been uploaded, and the
tag pushed in the repository, so I guess I'll have to prepare a third
RC (hopefully it will be really quick as nothing has changed).

What do you think?

Cheers,
Nico
-- 
Nicolas Petton
http://nicolas-petton.fr

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 512 bytes --]

Re: Emacs 24.5 second release candidate

[Alan Mackenzie]

Hello, Nicolas.

On Thu, Apr 02, 2015 at 03:49:02PM +0200, Nicolas Petton wrote:

> Nicolas Petton writes:

> > Glenn Morris writes:

> >> Trivia:
> >> You need to fix the Changelog entries. Remove all the old "24.5
> >> released" entries, and add new ones with the correct (anticipated)
> >> date.

> > Oh, thanks for double-checking.  Is it ok to just update the tarball?

> Now that I think about it, the RC2 has already been uploaded, and the
> tag pushed in the repository, so I guess I'll have to prepare a third
> RC (hopefully it will be really quick as nothing has changed).

> What do you think?

Bug #20245 has happened: in it, in a C++ Mode buffer, bits of text are
randomly losing their fontification.

Would it be possible to delay the next release candidate until I've had a
chance perhaps to diagnose this?

Thanks!

> Cheers,
> Nico
> -- 
> Nicolas Petton
> http://nicolas-petton.fr

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).

Re: Emacs 24.5 second release candidate

[Nicolas Petton]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 419 bytes --]


Alan Mackenzie writes:
> Bug #20245 has happened: in it, in a C++ Mode buffer, bits of text are
> randomly losing their fontification.
>
> Would it be possible to delay the next release candidate until I've had a
> chance perhaps to diagnose this?

I'm merely creating the tarball and uploading it.  I'll wait for
Stefan's decision about this.

Cheers,
Nico
-- 
Nicolas Petton
http://nicolas-petton.fr

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 512 bytes --]

Re: Emacs 24.5 second release candidate

[Stefan Monnier]

>> Bug #20245 has happened: in it, in a C++ Mode buffer, bits of text are
>> randomly losing their fontification.
>> Would it be possible to delay the next release candidate until I've had a
>> chance perhaps to diagnose this?

IIUC this is still a consequence of the fix to the "long union
highlighting" and that bug was a long standing bug.

The change to CC-mode's font-lock bounds has obviously far reaching
consequences, so I think it should be reverted for 24.5.

> I'm merely creating the tarball and uploading it.  I'll wait for
> Stefan's decision about this.

Actually, Eli is in charge of making these decisions,


        Stefan

Re: Emacs 24.5 second release candidate

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>
> Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2015 11:26:12 -0400
> Cc: Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>, emacs-devel <emacs-devel@gnu.org>,
> 	Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org>
> 
> >> Bug #20245 has happened: in it, in a C++ Mode buffer, bits of text are
> >> randomly losing their fontification.
> >> Would it be possible to delay the next release candidate until I've had a
> >> chance perhaps to diagnose this?
> 
> IIUC this is still a consequence of the fix to the "long union
> highlighting" and that bug was a long standing bug.
> 
> The change to CC-mode's font-lock bounds has obviously far reaching
> consequences, so I think it should be reverted for 24.5.

Yes, quite probably.  Where can I find the description of that "long
union highlighting" bug, please?

Re: Emacs 24.5 second release candidate

[Alan Mackenzie]

Hello, Eli.

On Thu, Apr 02, 2015 at 07:08:13PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>
> > Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2015 11:26:12 -0400
> > Cc: Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>, emacs-devel <emacs-devel@gnu.org>,
> > 	Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org>

> > >> Bug #20245 has happened: in it, in a C++ Mode buffer, bits of text are
> > >> randomly losing their fontification.
> > >> Would it be possible to delay the next release candidate until I've had a
> > >> chance perhaps to diagnose this?

> > IIUC this is still a consequence of the fix to the "long union
> > highlighting" and that bug was a long standing bug.

> > The change to CC-mode's font-lock bounds has obviously far reaching
> > consequences, so I think it should be reverted for 24.5.

> Yes, quite probably.  Where can I find the description of that "long
> union highlighting" bug, please?

I think Stefan means bug #19669.

"Long enums" used to be a problem for fontification when a jit-lock
500-byte chunk started in the middle of the braces, when the lack of
syntactic context would cause that chunk not to be fontified.  #19669
had things in common with that old state.

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).

Re: Emacs 24.5 second release candidate

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2015 16:19:50 +0000
> Cc: Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>, nicolas@petton.fr,
>   emacs-devel@gnu.org, rgm@gnu.org
> From: Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>
> 
> I think Stefan means bug #19669.
> 
> "Long enums" used to be a problem for fontification when a jit-lock
> 500-byte chunk started in the middle of the braces, when the lack of
> syntactic context would cause that chunk not to be fontified.  #19669
> had things in common with that old state.

But you seem to think the culprit was another change, not the one
prompted by #19669?

Re: Emacs 24.5 second release candidate

[Alan Mackenzie]

Hello, Eli.

On Thu, Apr 02, 2015 at 08:24:30PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2015 16:19:50 +0000
> > Cc: Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>, nicolas@petton.fr,
> >   emacs-devel@gnu.org, rgm@gnu.org
> > From: Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>

> > I think Stefan means bug #19669.

> > "Long enums" used to be a problem for fontification when a jit-lock
> > 500-byte chunk started in the middle of the braces, when the lack of
> > syntactic context would cause that chunk not to be fontified.  #19669
> > had things in common with that old state.

> But you seem to think the culprit was another change, not the one
> prompted by #19669?

I think the problem is years old, but has remained hidden because of
something that the fix to #19669 uncovered.  Or something like that.

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).

Re: Emacs 24.5 second release candidate

[Stefan Monnier]

>> > I think Stefan means bug #19669.

That's right.

> I think the problem is years old, but has remained hidden because of
> something that the fix to #19669 uncovered.  Or something like that.

I tend to agree.  The recent discussion about how jit/font-lock bounds work
leads me to think that the misunderstanding probably results in many
different bugs that just happen to occur rarely because usually the
bounds computed by font-lock-extend-after-change-region-function end up
passed mostly unmodified to font-lock-fontify-region.


        Stefan

Re: Emacs 24.5 second release candidate

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2015 14:02:28 +0000
> From: Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>
> Cc: Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org>, Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>,
> 	emacs-devel <emacs-devel@gnu.org>
> 
> Bug #20245 has happened: in it, in a C++ Mode buffer, bits of text are
> randomly losing their fontification.
> 
> Would it be possible to delay the next release candidate until I've had a
> chance perhaps to diagnose this?

Do you have an estimation of how much time you will need?

Also, was this bug caused by a recent commit, and if so, which one?

Re: Emacs 24.5 second release candidate

[Alan Mackenzie]

Hello, Eli.

On Thu, Apr 02, 2015 at 06:21:37PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2015 14:02:28 +0000
> > From: Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>
> > Cc: Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org>, Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>,
> > 	emacs-devel <emacs-devel@gnu.org>

> > Bug #20245 has happened: in it, in a C++ Mode buffer, bits of text are
> > randomly losing their fontification.

> > Would it be possible to delay the next release candidate until I've had a
> > chance perhaps to diagnose this?

> Do you have an estimation of how much time you will need?

Perhaps this evening, perhaps tomorrow morning.  It's one of these nasty
little bugs which looks totally wierd and random until one stumbles upon
the cause, after which it takes 2 minutes to fix.

> Also, was this bug caused by a recent commit, and if so, which one?

No, I don't think it was.  I think it was "unmasked" by a recent bug
"fix", d69e9f1c24f37f36af33b0468c5a4e100dbb09b6 from 2015-02-01.  Oleh
Krehel, the OP of the pertinent bug #20245, says that with that change
reversed, the bug symptoms don't manifest themselves.  I haven't checked
this yet, but it sounds plausible.  That fix is actually incomplete,
requiring Monday/yesterday's fix to make it complete.

I'm beginning to come round to the view that perhaps it might be best
just to take d69e9f1c24f37f36af33b0468c5a4e100dbb09b6 out of Emacs 24.5,
as Oleh Krehel has explicitly suggested.

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).

Re: Emacs 24.5 second release candidate

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2015 16:12:56 +0000
> From: Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>
> Cc: rgm@gnu.org, nicolas@petton.fr, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca,
> 	emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
> > Do you have an estimation of how much time you will need?
> 
> Perhaps this evening, perhaps tomorrow morning.  It's one of these nasty
> little bugs which looks totally wierd and random until one stumbles upon
> the cause, after which it takes 2 minutes to fix.
> 
> > Also, was this bug caused by a recent commit, and if so, which one?
> 
> No, I don't think it was.  I think it was "unmasked" by a recent bug
> "fix", d69e9f1c24f37f36af33b0468c5a4e100dbb09b6 from 2015-02-01.  Oleh
> Krehel, the OP of the pertinent bug #20245, says that with that change
> reversed, the bug symptoms don't manifest themselves.  I haven't checked
> this yet, but it sounds plausible.  That fix is actually incomplete,
> requiring Monday/yesterday's fix to make it complete.
> 
> I'm beginning to come round to the view that perhaps it might be best
> just to take d69e9f1c24f37f36af33b0468c5a4e100dbb09b6 out of Emacs 24.5,
> as Oleh Krehel has explicitly suggested.

Sounds plausible.  Please share your opinions after you study the
issue.

Re: Emacs 24.5 second release candidate

[Alan Mackenzie]

Hello, Eli.

On Thu, Apr 02, 2015 at 08:22:50PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2015 16:12:56 +0000
> > From: Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>
> > Cc: rgm@gnu.org, nicolas@petton.fr, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca,
> > 	emacs-devel@gnu.org

> > > Do you have an estimation of how much time you will need?

> > Perhaps this evening, perhaps tomorrow morning.  It's one of these nasty
> > little bugs which looks totally wierd and random until one stumbles upon
> > the cause, after which it takes 2 minutes to fix.

> > > Also, was this bug caused by a recent commit, and if so, which one?

> > No, I don't think it was.  I think it was "unmasked" by a recent bug
> > "fix", d69e9f1c24f37f36af33b0468c5a4e100dbb09b6 from 2015-02-01.  Oleh
> > Krehel, the OP of the pertinent bug #20245, says that with that change
> > reversed, the bug symptoms don't manifest themselves.  I haven't checked
> > this yet, but it sounds plausible.  That fix is actually incomplete,
> > requiring Monday/yesterday's fix to make it complete.

> > I'm beginning to come round to the view that perhaps it might be best
> > just to take d69e9f1c24f37f36af33b0468c5a4e100dbb09b6 out of Emacs 24.5,
> > as Oleh Krehel has explicitly suggested.

> Sounds plausible.  Please share your opinions after you study the
> issue.

OK.  Will do.  I'm hard at at, and making some progress.

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).

Re: Emacs 24.5 second release candidate

[Alan Mackenzie]

Hello, Eli.

On Thu, Apr 02, 2015 at 08:22:50PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2015 16:12:56 +0000
> > From: Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>
> > Cc: rgm@gnu.org, nicolas@petton.fr, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca,
> > 	emacs-devel@gnu.org

> > > Do you have an estimation of how much time you will need?

> > Perhaps this evening, perhaps tomorrow morning.  It's one of these nasty
> > little bugs which looks totally wierd and random until one stumbles upon
> > the cause, after which it takes 2 minutes to fix.

> > > Also, was this bug caused by a recent commit, and if so, which one?

> > No, I don't think it was.  I think it was "unmasked" by a recent bug
> > "fix", d69e9f1c24f37f36af33b0468c5a4e100dbb09b6 from 2015-02-01.  Oleh
> > Krehel, the OP of the pertinent bug #20245, says that with that change
> > reversed, the bug symptoms don't manifest themselves.  I haven't checked
> > this yet, but it sounds plausible.  That fix is actually incomplete,
> > requiring Monday/yesterday's fix to make it complete.

> > I'm beginning to come round to the view that perhaps it might be best
> > just to take d69e9f1c24f37f36af33b0468c5a4e100dbb09b6 out of Emacs 24.5,
> > as Oleh Krehel has explicitly suggested.

> Sounds plausible.  Please share your opinions after you study the
> issue.

I now understand precisely what the problem is.  Sorry it's taken me a
little longer than "perhaps tomorrow morning".

The problem is in `c-fl-decl-start', a routine called (indirectly) from
every `jit-lock-fontify-now'.  It attempts to check whether `start' is
within a declaration.

It does this by calling `c-beginning-of-decl-1' with a 500 byte search
limit.  c-b-o-d-1 wrongly returns the same value for "hit search limit"
as "found beginning of declaration".

So CC Mode's fontification is directed to start 500 bytes back, in the
middle of a #include directive.  This is not immediately apparent, only
becoming visible at the next redisplay.

This is indeed an old bug, unmasked by the d69e.... change rather than
caused by it.

I don't want to try to fix this in a few hours; a few days would be more
realistic.

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).

Re: Emacs 24.5 second release candidate

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2015 11:06:15 +0000
> Cc: rgm@gnu.org, nicolas@petton.fr, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca,
>   emacs-devel@gnu.org
> From: Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>
> 
> So CC Mode's fontification is directed to start 500 bytes back, in the
> middle of a #include directive.  This is not immediately apparent, only
> becoming visible at the next redisplay.
> 
> This is indeed an old bug, unmasked by the d69e.... change rather than
> caused by it.

OK, thanks for the analysis.

> I don't want to try to fix this in a few hours; a few days would be more
> realistic.

How about simply reverting d69e9f1c24f37f36af33b0468c5a4e100dbb09b6?
I'd like to avoid holding 24.5, unless reverting that commit would
result in some very bad behavior in frequent use cases.

We can always roll out 24.6 soon, if reverting that commit turns out
to be a bad call.

WDYT?

Re: Emacs 24.5 second release candidate

[Alan Mackenzie]

Hello again, Eli.

On Fri, Apr 03, 2015 at 02:30:01PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2015 11:06:15 +0000
> > Cc: rgm@gnu.org, nicolas@petton.fr, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca,
> >   emacs-devel@gnu.org
> > From: Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>

> > I don't want to try to fix this in a few hours; a few days would be
> > more realistic.

> How about simply reverting d69e9f1c24f37f36af33b0468c5a4e100dbb09b6?
> I'd like to avoid holding 24.5, unless reverting that commit would
> result in some very bad behavior in frequent use cases.

I think this would be for the best.  It's just the bug it "fixed" will
remain apparent.  Could you perhaps give me a tip as to how best to
revert a commit with git?

> We can always roll out 24.6 soon, if reverting that commit turns out
> to be a bad call.

I'll have a quick check on subsequent commits - hey, there aren't any!  I
don't think reverting this will have any ill effects.

> WDYT?

We should revert d69e...

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).

Re: Emacs 24.5 second release candidate

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2015 11:51:42 +0000
> Cc: rgm@gnu.org, nicolas@petton.fr, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca,
>   emacs-devel@gnu.org
> From: Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>
> 
> > How about simply reverting d69e9f1c24f37f36af33b0468c5a4e100dbb09b6?
> > I'd like to avoid holding 24.5, unless reverting that commit would
> > result in some very bad behavior in frequent use cases.
> 
> I think this would be for the best.  It's just the bug it "fixed" will
> remain apparent.  Could you perhaps give me a tip as to how best to
> revert a commit with git?

Like this:

 $ git revert d69e9f1c24f37f36af33b0468c5a4e100dbb09b6

This applies the reverse changes, and commits them.  IOW, the original
commit is not removed; instead, a new commit is added that undoes the
effects of that old commit.

Then "git show" to see what you are about to push, and then "git
push".

Be sure to do this in the emacs-24 branch, i.e. "git checkout emacs-24" 
before doing the above.

Thanks.

Re: Emacs 24.5 second release candidate

[Alan Mackenzie]

Hello, Eli.

On Fri, Apr 03, 2015 at 03:00:55PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2015 11:51:42 +0000
> > Cc: rgm@gnu.org, nicolas@petton.fr, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca,
> >   emacs-devel@gnu.org
> > From: Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>

> > I think this would be for the best.  It's just the bug it "fixed" will
> > remain apparent.  Could you perhaps give me a tip as to how best to
> > revert a commit with git?

> Like this:

>  $ git revert d69e9f1c24f37f36af33b0468c5a4e100dbb09b6

> This applies the reverse changes, and commits them.  IOW, the original
> commit is not removed; instead, a new commit is added that undoes the
> effects of that old commit.

> Then "git show" to see what you are about to push, and then "git
> push".

> Be sure to do this in the emacs-24 branch, i.e. "git checkout emacs-24" 
> before doing the above.

It's now done.

> Thanks.

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).

Re: Emacs 24.5 second release candidate

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2015 12:29:25 +0000
> Cc: rgm@gnu.org, nicolas@petton.fr, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca,
>   emacs-devel@gnu.org
> From: Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>
> 
> > Like this:
> 
> >  $ git revert d69e9f1c24f37f36af33b0468c5a4e100dbb09b6
> 
> > This applies the reverse changes, and commits them.  IOW, the original
> > commit is not removed; instead, a new commit is added that undoes the
> > effects of that old commit.
> 
> > Then "git show" to see what you are about to push, and then "git
> > push".
> 
> > Be sure to do this in the emacs-24 branch, i.e. "git checkout emacs-24" 
> > before doing the above.
> 
> It's now done.

Thank you.

Re: Emacs 24.5 second release candidate

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Fri, 03 Apr 2015 15:51:41 +0300
> From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
> Cc: rgm@gnu.org, nicolas@petton.fr, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca,
> 	emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
> > Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2015 12:29:25 +0000
> > Cc: rgm@gnu.org, nicolas@petton.fr, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca,
> >   emacs-devel@gnu.org
> > From: Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>
> > 
> > > Like this:
> > 
> > >  $ git revert d69e9f1c24f37f36af33b0468c5a4e100dbb09b6
> > 
> > > This applies the reverse changes, and commits them.  IOW, the original
> > > commit is not removed; instead, a new commit is added that undoes the
> > > effects of that old commit.
> > 
> > > Then "git show" to see what you are about to push, and then "git
> > > push".
> > 
> > > Be sure to do this in the emacs-24 branch, i.e. "git checkout emacs-24" 
> > > before doing the above.
> > 
> > It's now done.
> 
> Thank you.

Nicolas, in case it wasn't clear: the path is now clear for you to
make another RC, hopefully the last one.  TIA.

Re: Emacs 24.5 second release candidate

[Nicolas Petton]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1538 bytes --]


Eli Zaretskii writes:

>> Date: Fri, 03 Apr 2015 15:51:41 +0300
>> From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
>> Cc: rgm@gnu.org, nicolas@petton.fr, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca,
>> 	emacs-devel@gnu.org
>> 
>> > Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2015 12:29:25 +0000
>> > Cc: rgm@gnu.org, nicolas@petton.fr, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca,
>> >   emacs-devel@gnu.org
>> > From: Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>
>> > 
>> > > Like this:
>> > 
>> > >  $ git revert d69e9f1c24f37f36af33b0468c5a4e100dbb09b6
>> > 
>> > > This applies the reverse changes, and commits them.  IOW, the original
>> > > commit is not removed; instead, a new commit is added that undoes the
>> > > effects of that old commit.
>> > 
>> > > Then "git show" to see what you are about to push, and then "git
>> > > push".
>> > 
>> > > Be sure to do this in the emacs-24 branch, i.e. "git checkout emacs-24" 
>> > > before doing the above.
>> > 
>> > It's now done.
>> 
>> Thank you.
>
> Nicolas, in case it wasn't clear: the path is now clear for you to
> make another RC, hopefully the last one.  TIA.

Thank you.  I'm just reading my emails now, and I will prepare the next
RC that sometime before or during monday.

Since this RC will be late, I suggest reschedule the release to later
next week.

Next Friday would be easier for me as Monday is a holiday in France and
I will be off my computer, Tuesday I'm traveling the entire day, and I
host an Emacs Meetup on Thursday that I have a prepare for.

WDYT?
Nico
-- 
Nicolas Petton
http://nicolas-petton.fr

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 512 bytes --]

RE: Emacs 24.5 second release candidate

[Drew Adams]

> Next Friday would be easier for me as Monday is a holiday in France and
> I will be off my computer

Off your computer on a holiday?  Be careful; that's an early warning
sign of looming sanity. ;-)

Re: Emacs 24.5 second release candidate

[Nicolas Petton]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 340 bytes --]


Drew Adams writes:

>> Next Friday would be easier for me as Monday is a holiday in France and
>> I will be off my computer
>
> Off your computer on a holiday?  Be careful; that's an early warning
> sign of looming sanity. ;-)

No need to worry, I usually don't do that ;-)

Nico
-- 
Nicolas Petton
http://nicolas-petton.fr

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 512 bytes --]

Re: Emacs 24.5 second release candidate

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Nicolas Petton <nicolas@petton.fr>
> Cc: nicolas@petton.fr, acm@muc.de, rgm@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Sun, 05 Apr 2015 00:20:17 +0200
> 
> > Nicolas, in case it wasn't clear: the path is now clear for you to
> > make another RC, hopefully the last one.  TIA.
> 
> Thank you.  I'm just reading my emails now, and I will prepare the next
> RC that sometime before or during monday.

OK, thanks.

> Since this RC will be late, I suggest reschedule the release to later
> next week.
> 
> Next Friday would be easier for me as Monday is a holiday in France and
> I will be off my computer, Tuesday I'm traveling the entire day, and I
> host an Emacs Meetup on Thursday that I have a prepare for.
> 
> WDYT?

Next Friday is fine, thank you.

Re: Emacs 24.5 second release candidate

[Andreas Röhler]

Bug #20245 has happened: in it, in a C++ Mode buffer, bits of text are 
randomly losing their fontification. Would it be possible to delay the 
next release candidate until I've had a chance perhaps to diagnose this? 
Thanks!

This bug-report only displays a screenshot. Is there some example-code 
to play with?

Thanks,

Andreas

Re: Emacs 24.5 second release candidate

[Alan Mackenzie]

Hello, Andreas

On Fri, Apr 03, 2015 at 09:28:11AM +0200, Andreas Röhler wrote:
> Bug #20245 has happened: in it, in a C++ Mode buffer, bits of text are 
> randomly losing their fontification. Would it be possible to delay the 
> next release candidate until I've had a chance perhaps to diagnose this? 
> Thanks!

> This bug-report only displays a screenshot. Is there some example-code 
> to play with?

The OP supplied me with the following link to an afflicted file:
https://github.com/dune-project/dune-pdelab-howto/blob/master/src/navier-stokes/cgstokes_instat.cc

I now understand the cause of the problem, as I described in a post to
Eli.

> Thanks,

> Andreas

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).

Re: Emacs 24.5 second release candidate

[Andreas Röhler]

Am 03.04.2015 um 13:57 schrieb Alan Mackenzie:

Hi Alan,

thanks, got and see it.

In case I might be helpful testing a patch, please point me onto the 
branch in question then.

Cheers,

Andreas