From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: windows Emacs-version issue Date: Sat, 07 May 2022 09:18:48 -0400 Message-ID: References: <857d70m4xd.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="39801"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , Glenn Morris , Sivaram Neelakantan , Emacs developers To: Corwin Brust Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat May 07 15:20:33 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1nnKMK-000A8q-6Q for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 07 May 2022 15:20:32 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35090 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nnKMI-0007MX-Ql for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 07 May 2022 09:20:30 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:43592) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nnKKq-0005tZ-28 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 07 May 2022 09:19:00 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:2283) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nnKKm-0003Z3-0k; Sat, 07 May 2022 09:18:57 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id CE510100280; Sat, 7 May 2022 09:18:52 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 716E8100138; Sat, 7 May 2022 09:18:51 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1651929531; bh=vMly4sL9lXYbiY8g/cT8JuXIUYubZfNVTkX4BrzBNhQ=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=BVK3kP7SROOhWfV/RSom01ceargoQnU3RSaSlFoCSV9NIZgdeCOYS6yxBZ3ias2BK o0fUkV7q3e0lx/fpmrsl/S6USI/RTXQDLe0cdNtY9HwbmtHiUglSYP8YzRbfrcY6lb uSvjtsjfLe+VqGCd60ox1RhYz1PHsV9oaO7OL9ilU5i4QEsZvMnxRSRPTjC9xKJ94+ QqBY/HjL/LZvIeaAVSUJD5V60FFzMkKqzJLhgDk+0a0EwxfzCt6luYhjtGgjpcFvcn FQAQVNMnAKCcx0qJ4CJWhuhssygblHHRsQRLXtT+682YV4bRpKyGAduZaJPbGNDXcZ VtsqS83YlzVVg== Original-Received: from alfajor (modemcable034.207-20-96.mc.videotron.ca [96.20.207.34]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4DEFA120197; Sat, 7 May 2022 09:18:51 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Corwin Brust's message of "Fri, 6 May 2022 20:42:57 -0500") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:289388 Archived-At: > I think it would be ideal to hear from other people who are using > these binaries releases before we elect a change in naming these > files; they have been consistent for quite some time. I was using them > for years before I volunteered to help create them. There's no need to rename. It's only something to remember for next time such a situation comes up. > Finally, this isn't a circumstance that's likely to repeat. It's something that happens rarely but it does happen occasionally. It can happen for binary packages like the one you distribute, or for the release tarballs (we've had release tarballs with a minor error in some documentation files where there is similarly a tendency to think "bah I'll just replace the tarball with the new one"), ... Just remember to avoid replacing a distribution file with a different one, and prefer to use a new name for the new file instead. It avoids all kinds of (minor, but annoying) issues. Which name you use at that occasion is not nearly as important as the fact that it's a different name. IIRC we've use `emacs-NN.MMa.tar.gz` in the past. Stefan