From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Miles Bader Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Updating release version to 22.1 Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2005 17:41:37 +0900 Message-ID: References: <87vf92sqby.fsf@marant.org> Reply-To: snogglethorpe@gmail.com, miles@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1107941226 8783 80.91.229.2 (9 Feb 2005 09:27:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2005 09:27:06 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=E9r=F4me_Marant?= , miles@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Feb 09 10:27:05 2005 Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Cyo7a-0007Md-Fl for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 09 Feb 2005 10:26:54 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1CyoM5-00031K-3K for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 09 Feb 2005 04:41:53 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1CynkV-00049n-Cq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Feb 2005 04:03:03 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1CynkS-00048k-3x for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Feb 2005 04:03:00 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1CynkR-00046i-1P for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Feb 2005 04:02:59 -0500 Original-Received: from [64.233.184.201] (helo=wproxy.gmail.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CynPm-0001AU-If for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Feb 2005 03:41:38 -0500 Original-Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 40so111680wri for ; Wed, 09 Feb 2005 00:41:37 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references; b=h12cwHhby5hfgPy9N+5luCZQtW7PXk1e2FcnuNtG2TYFe/mef4kBY6S1zCtDycrskqW3chIVmpehZqV73pFdLqSxqNxOEWUejGAp2sppvycgbXAOxjcapdIBRZqgFOY2aliaGEa/b4q/J69aAVmCa5+8UpqWZ7EgBUuf1gnB1YA= Original-Received: by 10.54.19.28 with SMTP id 28mr426429wrs; Wed, 09 Feb 2005 00:41:37 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.54.19.70 with HTTP; Wed, 9 Feb 2005 00:41:37 -0800 (PST) Original-To: "Kim F. Storm" In-Reply-To: X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-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: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:33123 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:33123 On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 09:30:42 +0100, Kim F. Storm wrote: > Miles Bader writes: >=20 > > On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 01:17:30 +0100, Kim F. Storm wrote: > >> > On Tue, 08 Feb 2005 22:18:41 +0100, J=E9r=F4me Marant wrote: > >> >> What's the rational for not using 22.0.x for development versions? > >> >> It would be so much simpler ... > >> > >> Because it - IMO - is confusing. > > > > What, compared to all the other bizarro schemes being suggested here > > ("hey I know, let's make pre-releases _blue_, and real releases > > _green_!")? You've got to be kidding... please say you're kidding... >=20 > Not really! >=20 > The problem with our _current_ scheme is that even though we seem to want= to > postpone the decision about exactly what number the next release gets, it > is recorded _NUMEROUS_ places all over the sources and other files > (in total, I had to change 21.4 to 22.1 in more than 500 places). >=20 > I don't want us to get into that mess again -- so I want a scheme > where the next release number is _fixed_ from the start. I have no idea what you're talking about. The problems caused by the current "mess" (21.4 released to mean something else, 22.1 chosen for next release) would have happened regardless of what scheme was chosen (including all of your wacky ones), because what occured is that an extra real release was added in between the last real release and the designated next real release.=20 No amount of futzing around with pre-release names would have changed that. The questions, as I understand it, are merely (1) how to call real releases, and (2) how to call pre-releases. For the next release at least, it's been decided that (1) will be "22.1"; what I understand J=E9r=F4me to have meant is that (2) in this case should be "22.0.x", where x =3D 1, 2, 3, ... -Miles --=20 Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.