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: Version strings in lisp files? Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2012 15:40:33 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87fwbxe34b.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <83sjfxgpy8.fsf@gnu.org> <878vhpxjhj.fsf@gnu.org> <83mx65goj2.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1335037250 29465 80.91.229.3 (21 Apr 2012 19:40:50 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2012 19:40:50 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Bastien , Stromeko@nexgo.de, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Apr 21 21:40:48 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1SLgAp-0006qi-0w for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 21 Apr 2012 21:40:47 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:46040 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SLgAo-0002za-D5 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 21 Apr 2012 15:40:46 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:50968) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SLgAl-0002zG-58 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 21 Apr 2012 15:40:44 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SLgAj-00006M-Hi for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 21 Apr 2012 15:40:42 -0400 Original-Received: from ironport-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.143.162]:48464) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SLgAe-0008UA-OK; Sat, 21 Apr 2012 15:40:36 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApYIACxOgk/O+K5t/2dsb2JhbABDuCMDgQyBCIIJAQEEAVYjBQsLNBIUGA0kiBwFtjKLYYR5BKRFgV2DAw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.75,391,1330923600"; d="scan'208";a="175821300" Original-Received: from 206-248-174-109.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([206.248.174.109]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 21 Apr 2012 15:40:33 -0400 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 25D9958D2D; Sat, 21 Apr 2012 15:40:33 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <83mx65goj2.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sat, 21 Apr 2012 17:14:41 +0300") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.94 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 206.248.143.162 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:149927 Archived-At: > AFAIK, the policy is that _if_ you want some version string in a > package, then keep that to a minimum (1 file). But there's no policy, > AFAIK, to have a version string, if Org doesn't need that. Yes, the fewer version numbers (and $Log$-style history) the better. That's for "files under revision control". Such data added dynamically during the build is perfectly fine, in pretty much any amount. We do tolerate a few version tags in a few files because occasionally people find it handy, but we definitely do not require them. Stefan