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: bootstrap problem with union Lisp_Object Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 00:28:53 +0100 Message-ID: References: <55DA5764-DDB6-4858-9CE2-065857CDC863@gnu.org> <3AFF0594-F842-4079-9A3B-D1CF7358A281@raeburn.org> <0D268F0D-B278-4307-86E3-E0FCE7A3B57B@raeburn.org> <87pso6anui.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1134257428 7135 80.91.229.2 (10 Dec 2005 23:30:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 23:30:28 +0000 (UTC) Cc: schwab@suse.de, raeburn@raeburn.org, Stefan Monnier , emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Dec 11 00:30:24 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ElEA2-0002zr-Ok for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 11 Dec 2005 00:29:51 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ElEAS-0004Zw-7a for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 10 Dec 2005 18:30:16 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1ElEAD-0004Zj-Dd for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Dec 2005 18:30:01 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1ElEAC-0004ZX-NL for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Dec 2005 18:30:01 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ElEAC-0004ZU-Jx for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Dec 2005 18:30:00 -0500 Original-Received: from [195.41.46.237] (helo=pfepc.post.tele.dk) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1ElEBd-0002Rd-Eb; Sat, 10 Dec 2005 18:31:29 -0500 Original-Received: from kfs-l.imdomain.dk.cua.dk (0x503e2644.bynxx3.adsl-dhcp.tele.dk [80.62.38.68]) by pfepc.post.tele.dk (Postfix) with SMTP id C54FA26283F; Sun, 11 Dec 2005 00:29:27 +0100 (CET) Original-To: rms@gnu.org In-Reply-To: (Richard M. Stallman's message of "Fri, 09 Dec 2005 16:14:26 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) 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:47410 Archived-At: "Richard M. Stallman" writes: > I don't see why those things need to all be fixed before we start > the pretest. > > Because we aim to make a release with all known bugs fixed. How can we do that without some kind of bug tracking system? And who decides what is a "bug" and what is a "missing feature" or "enhancement request". May I suggest that you (RMS) add _all_ bugs that you want to be fixed before the release to FOR-RELEASE, and then change the above to: "Because we aim to make a release with all the bugs listed in FOR-RELEASE fixed." Or even better, we should make a file etc/KNOWN_BUGS which we can keep up-to-date with known, unresolved bugs. Then we can _at any time_ decide that the bugs listed in KNOWN_BUGS are not severe enough to justify delaying the release. And we should distribute KNOWN_BUGS with the release, so users can look in that file to see if we already know about a bug (M-x report-emacs-bug could point users to that file). > It makes no sense to postpone debugging the bugs we know about > in order to discover more bugs. Who's talking about postponing debugging of known bugs? So I disagree! Some bugs are more severe than others, and one of the most severe has yet to be resolved -- the more people who test the software, the better the chance of narrowing in on that bug. So let's start the pretest NOW! -- Kim F. Storm http://www.cua.dk