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: 21.2.90 pretest, 21.3, 21.4... Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 16:25:04 +0200 (IST) Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <5xbs52oor1.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1036593724 27600 80.91.224.249 (6 Nov 2002 14:42:04 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 14:42:04 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 189RMo-00076f-00 for ; Wed, 06 Nov 2002 15:41:14 +0100 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 189RVL-0003aa-00 for ; Wed, 06 Nov 2002 15:50:03 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 189RLP-0000yX-00; Wed, 06 Nov 2002 09:39:47 -0500 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 189R7N-00033v-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Nov 2002 09:25:17 -0500 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 189R7G-0002vo-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Nov 2002 09:25:13 -0500 Original-Received: from is.elta.co.il ([199.203.121.2]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 189R7E-0002qr-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Nov 2002 09:25:09 -0500 Original-Received: from is (is [199.203.121.2]) by is.elta.co.il (8.9.3/8.8.8) with SMTP id QAA07272; Wed, 6 Nov 2002 16:25:04 +0200 (IST) X-Sender: eliz@is Original-To: "Kim F. Storm" In-Reply-To: <5xbs52oor1.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> 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:9185 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:9185 On 6 Nov 2002, Kim F. Storm wrote: > IMO, a feature freeze on the trunk at the current state would be OK! > > There are now so many new features and fixes compared to 21.[1-3], that > starting a pretest cycle for 21.4 from the trunk would be a _good thing_ > to start getting all those new features tested (before we add even more > features). That means 2 pretests at once (as long as 21.3 is not released). I don't think we can handle that. > Admittedly, it would halt "development" on the trunk for, say 2-3 > months, but what's the purpose of such developments anyway if we > (virtually) never make a release containing those new features? That's what we did before branches. I'm not sure we should go back to that model. The reason for the branch was that many developers are interested in development much more than they are interested in pretest and other mundane tasks which are important for fast releases after the freeze. The branch was supposed to give those people an opportunity to check in changes even as the pretest was under way. > Are anyone of you aware of any significant stability (or redisplay) > related bugs that we need to fix before 21.4 ? Emacs 21.1 was stable for me more than a year before it was released. The pretest phase found problems none of the developers ever saw. Moral: don't make decisions about stability based on what people who read this forum tell you.