From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: pretest 22.0.100 Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 10:20:39 -0400 Message-ID: References: <873b22nd3f.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <17992.54265.248694.83627@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <464C4F64.2030402@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1179411658 27951 80.91.229.12 (17 May 2007 14:20:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 14:20:58 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Nick Roberts , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Jason Rumney Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu May 17 16:20:57 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Hogqf-0001MD-5V for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 17 May 2007 16:20:57 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Hogyl-0004vB-92 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 17 May 2007 10:29:19 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Hogyh-0004uo-C7 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 17 May 2007 10:29:15 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Hogyg-0004uS-Qn for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 17 May 2007 10:29:14 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Hogyg-0004uO-Ke for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 17 May 2007 10:29:14 -0400 Original-Received: from 18.red-83-50-230.dynamicip.rima-tde.net ([83.50.230.18] helo=alfajor.home) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1HogqX-0004Iv-FQ; Thu, 17 May 2007 10:20:50 -0400 Original-Received: by alfajor.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 649D71C150; Thu, 17 May 2007 10:20:39 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <464C4F64.2030402@gnu.org> (Jason Rumney's message of "Thu\, 17 May 2007 13\:49\:40 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.95 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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 Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:71248 Archived-At: >> Yes, the same mistake was made then (but was not made for Emacs-20.1). >> It's no excuse to repeat it. > If it was deliberate, then it was not a mistake. And history shows that > Emacs has always had version numbers, not version strings. If people feel so strongly about it, go for it and use 22.0.100 or any other number that makes you happy, really. I just think 22.0.990 etc... is much cleverer since it makes it both numerically and alphabetically increasing. I never imagined people would waste time arguing against it. Stefan