From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: html-mode demanding a bit too tight Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 22:53:36 +0200 Message-ID: References: <87647ooxwm.fsf@zip.com.au> <462CC030.8030203@gmail.com> <87mz0y8vyk.fsf@zip.com.au> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1177707247 28929 80.91.229.12 (27 Apr 2007 20:54:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 20:54:07 +0000 (UTC) Cc: rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Apr 27 22:54:05 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 1HhXS8-0001kJ-9E for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 27 Apr 2007 22:54:04 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HhXY0-0002oJ-PY for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 27 Apr 2007 17:00:08 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HhXXy-0002o4-03 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 27 Apr 2007 17:00:06 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HhXXw-0002ns-Lo for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 27 Apr 2007 17:00:05 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HhXXw-0002np-J1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 27 Apr 2007 17:00:04 -0400 Original-Received: from pfepc.post.tele.dk ([195.41.46.237]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1HhXS1-0004yi-KE; Fri, 27 Apr 2007 16:53:57 -0400 Original-Received: from kfs-l.imdomain.dk.cua.dk (0x503e2644.bynxx19.adsl-dhcp.tele.dk [80.62.38.68]) by pfepc.post.tele.dk (Postfix) with SMTP id 816038A002D; Fri, 27 Apr 2007 22:53:54 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Fri\, 27 Apr 2007 15\:53\:08 +0300") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.98 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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:70288 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> From: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) >> Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 12:27:06 +0200 >> Cc: Glenn Morris , user42@zip.com.au, emacs-devel@gnu.org >> >> Once we have rolled the .100 pretest (very soon I hope), >> >> PLEASE DO NOT INSTALL _ANY_ PATCHES on the EMACS_22_BASE branch, >> >> unless they are directly related to breakage caused by one of the >> recent changes made before the .100 pretest. > > Actually, I think even changes that _are_ directly related to recent > breakage should be committed only very selectively: if the breakage > they caused is really severe. I agree. In my book "breakage" implies "severe" :-) -- Kim F. Storm http://www.cua.dk