From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: No calc in pretest? Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 07:49:27 +0300 (IDT) Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <200207021917.g62JHe419454@rum.cs.yale.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1025672047 3146 127.0.0.1 (3 Jul 2002 04:54:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 04:54:07 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Emacs Devel Mailing List Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 17Pc9X-0000od-00 for ; Wed, 03 Jul 2002 06:54:07 +0200 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 17PcEs-00077Z-00 for ; Wed, 03 Jul 2002 06:59:38 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 17Pc9g-00081X-00; Wed, 03 Jul 2002 00:54:16 -0400 Original-Received: from is.elta.co.il ([199.203.121.2]) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 17Pc7G-0007p6-00 for ; Wed, 03 Jul 2002 00:51:47 -0400 Original-Received: from is (is [199.203.121.2]) by is.elta.co.il (8.9.3/8.8.8) with SMTP id HAA18330; Wed, 3 Jul 2002 07:49:27 +0300 (IDT) X-Sender: eliz@is Original-To: Stefan Monnier In-Reply-To: <200207021917.g62JHe419454@rum.cs.yale.edu> Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:5386 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:5386 On Tue, 2 Jul 2002, Stefan Monnier wrote: > > > One reason is that we don't have to update :version fields and > > > documentation if there is a well defined versioning scheme. > > > > I sincerely doubt that the version-update problem will go away with > > _any_ versioning scheme. > > It will "go away" if the versioning scheme ensures that the version > number of a release can be determined long before the release happens > (i.e. is independent of any other release that might happen in the > mean time). That's exactly what I doubt will ever happen. Humans are too imperfect.