From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: English usage bug in bytecomp.el
Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2005 22:12:59 -0500
Message-ID: <E1D8rd5-00070L-3C@fencepost.gnu.org>
References: <fc339e4a05030715093f0987a1@mail.gmail.com>
	<Pine.LNX.3.96.1050308073303.661A-100000@acm.acm>
	<fc339e4a050308015760de2423@mail.gmail.com>
Reply-To: rms@gnu.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org
X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1110339241 17001 80.91.229.2 (9 Mar 2005 03:34:01 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2005 03:34:01 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: acm@muc.de, miles@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org
Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 09 04:34:01 2005
Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165])
	by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1D8rxJ-0004pb-O2
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2005 04:33:53 +0100
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1D8sBu-0002Cq-NZ
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 08 Mar 2005 22:48:58 -0500
Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1D8sAg-0001vo-W6
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Mar 2005 22:47:45 -0500
Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1D8sAW-0001q6-Ey
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Mar 2005 22:47:33 -0500
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1D8sAU-0001mQ-TA
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Mar 2005 22:47:30 -0500
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1D8rd5-0000PU-EE
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Mar 2005 22:12:59 -0500
Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.34)
	id 1D8rd5-00070L-3C; Tue, 08 Mar 2005 22:12:59 -0500
Original-To: snogglethorpe@gmail.com, miles@gnu.org
In-reply-to: <fc339e4a050308015760de2423@mail.gmail.com> (message from Miles
	Bader on Tue, 8 Mar 2005 18:57:31 +0900)
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=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
X-MailScanner-To: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org
Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:34351
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:34351

    However, a variant which might be even clearer, and maybe less
    objectionable would be

How about "FOO is an obsolete function (now and since 21.4)".
Or "FOO is an obsolete function (marked obsolete in Emacs 21.4)".