From: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm)
Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: [rmail-mbox-branch]: expunge
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 11:23:58 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m3fz58vx3l.fsf@kfs-l.imdomain.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1096014084.739640.30529.nullmailer@Update.UU.SE> (Alfred M. Szmidt's message of "Fri, 24 Sep 2004 10:21:24 +0200")
"Alfred M. Szmidt" <ams@kemisten.nu> writes:
> > [I wouldn't recommened merging this back into trunk by a long
> > shot, it is far to broken]
>
> It seems that the new rmail-mbox-branch code is quite far from
> 'production quality' so IMHO it is not ready for inclusion in 21.4.
>
> I'm kinda curious if anyone actually used the rmail-mbox-branch
> before... I was hoping that it would only contain minor bugs, but it
> contains some quite serious bugs (eating my mail is serious, not even
> being able to run it is serious since it means that it hasn't been
> even tested!).
>
> Do we really need to postpone the release of 21.4 just for this one
> feature? Can't it wait until 22.1 ?
>
> To me as a user of rmail, I would really prefer it to wait for 22.1.
> Right now it is far to broken, if there were more people that could
> actualy help out and test it and send patches, then just maybe. Even
> if I said that one shouldn't merge that branch into trunk, maybe that
> would be one good way to force people who use rmail to actually use it
> and fix it right now and get it ready for 21.4; but I don't know what
> the current status of the tree is right now.
>
> And anyway, the babyl format has been used for such a long time that
> postponing this feature until 22.1, 23.1 or even 100.1 won't do any
> harm anyway.
>
> Those are just my opionions as a user of rmail and emacs; feel free to
> ignore them completely.
I think your opinion (based on actual experience with using the code)
is very important (to me at least :-) as it clearly expresses the
concern I have had (and expressed) for some time regarding the mbox
branch:
Unless we are 99.9% confident that the new mbox-rmail works as good
the the current babyl-rmail, releasing 21.4 with a broken/deficient
mbox-rmail would be a disaster!
Your findings indicates to me that we are far from those 99.9% ...
And as you say, babyl has done the job fine for MANY years, so what's
wrong using it a little longer (1-2 years isn't long in emacs
development :-)
--
Kim F. Storm <storm@cua.dk> http://www.cua.dk
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-09-24 9:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 109+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-09-24 6:09 [rmail-mbox-branch]: expunge Alfred M. Szmidt
2004-09-24 7:16 ` Kim F. Storm
2004-09-24 8:21 ` Alfred M. Szmidt
2004-09-24 9:23 ` Kim F. Storm [this message]
2004-09-24 12:03 ` Paul Michael Reilly
2004-09-25 7:08 ` Richard Stallman
2004-10-03 10:40 ` Alexander Pohoyda
2004-10-04 15:18 ` Richard Stallman
2004-10-06 21:38 ` [rmail-mbox-branch]: mail-utils Alexander Pohoyda
2004-10-06 21:47 ` Miles Bader
2004-10-08 23:34 ` Alexander Pohoyda
2004-10-08 23:47 ` Miles Bader
2004-10-09 16:04 ` Alexander Pohoyda
2004-10-09 17:12 ` Stefan
2004-10-09 18:15 ` Alexander Pohoyda
2004-10-09 18:20 ` Miles Bader
2004-10-09 21:02 ` Alexander Pohoyda
2004-10-09 21:10 ` Miles Bader
2004-10-09 21:19 ` Miles Bader
2004-10-10 15:15 ` Richard Stallman
2004-10-10 22:58 ` Miles Bader
2004-10-11 16:45 ` Richard Stallman
2004-10-12 2:09 ` Miles Bader
2004-10-12 14:42 ` Juri Linkov
2004-10-12 15:03 ` Miles Bader
2004-10-12 16:05 ` Syncing Gnus with Emacs and back (was: [rmail-mbox-branch]: mail-utils) Reiner Steib
2004-10-13 1:26 ` Syncing Gnus with Emacs and back Miles Bader
2004-10-13 20:21 ` Reiner Steib
2004-10-13 22:51 ` Miles Bader
2004-10-14 7:47 ` Miles Bader
2004-10-13 14:43 ` [rmail-mbox-branch]: mail-utils Richard Stallman
2004-10-09 19:02 ` Stefan
2004-10-09 20:40 ` Alexander Pohoyda
2004-10-11 10:36 ` Simon Josefsson
2004-10-08 16:06 ` Richard Stallman
2004-10-08 23:17 ` Alexander Pohoyda
2004-10-10 15:16 ` Richard Stallman
2004-10-10 23:50 ` Alexander Pohoyda
2004-10-11 16:45 ` Richard Stallman
2004-10-11 19:01 ` Alexander Pohoyda
2004-10-12 8:57 ` Richard Stallman
2004-10-12 16:12 ` Alexander Pohoyda
2004-10-13 14:42 ` Richard Stallman
2004-10-13 18:16 ` how-many/count-matches for non-interactive use Alexander Pohoyda
2004-10-15 0:26 ` Richard Stallman
2004-10-15 6:28 ` Alexander Pohoyda
2004-10-15 12:22 ` Richard Stallman
2004-10-15 15:30 ` Alexander Pohoyda
2004-10-16 13:52 ` Richard Stallman
2004-10-16 21:49 ` Alexander Pohoyda
2004-10-15 12:54 ` Stefan
2004-10-16 13:51 ` Richard Stallman
2004-10-16 18:41 ` Stefan Monnier
2004-10-16 22:00 ` Kim F. Storm
2004-10-17 15:19 ` Stefan Monnier
2004-10-17 20:53 ` Luc Teirlinck
2004-10-17 21:44 ` Stefan Monnier
2004-10-18 8:39 ` Kim F. Storm
2004-10-18 13:59 ` Richard Stallman
2004-10-19 1:58 ` Luc Teirlinck
2004-10-19 2:08 ` Luc Teirlinck
2004-10-19 10:29 ` Kim F. Storm
2004-10-19 17:17 ` Alexander Pohoyda
2004-10-20 12:01 ` Kim F. Storm
2004-10-19 16:46 ` Richard Stallman
2004-10-19 22:08 ` Kim F. Storm
2004-10-21 1:45 ` Richard Stallman
2004-10-21 3:22 ` Luc Teirlinck
2004-10-20 1:14 ` Luc Teirlinck
2004-10-20 1:35 ` David Kastrup
2004-10-20 13:28 ` Robert J. Chassell
2004-10-20 1:27 ` Luc Teirlinck
2004-10-21 1:45 ` Richard Stallman
2004-10-21 3:08 ` Luc Teirlinck
2004-10-22 10:47 ` Richard Stallman
2004-10-22 12:54 ` Convert keyboard macros to Lisp (was: how-many/count-matches for non-interactive use) Juri Linkov
2004-10-23 13:54 ` Richard Stallman
2004-10-22 17:35 ` how-many/count-matches for non-interactive use Luc Teirlinck
2004-10-22 22:22 ` Luc Teirlinck
2004-10-23 1:53 ` Luc Teirlinck
2004-10-23 11:32 ` John Paul Wallington
2004-10-23 18:49 ` Richard Stallman
2004-10-23 20:36 ` Luc Teirlinck
2004-10-24 17:09 ` Richard Stallman
2004-10-26 3:09 ` Luc Teirlinck
2004-10-26 8:19 ` Kim F. Storm
2004-11-02 8:53 ` Richard Stallman
2004-10-24 2:31 ` Luc Teirlinck
2004-10-24 17:09 ` Richard Stallman
2004-10-25 1:53 ` Luc Teirlinck
2004-10-26 9:05 ` Richard Stallman
2004-10-25 2:53 ` Luc Teirlinck
2004-10-26 9:04 ` Richard Stallman
2004-10-25 3:08 ` Luc Teirlinck
2004-10-24 17:09 ` Richard Stallman
2004-10-23 18:49 ` Richard Stallman
2004-10-25 14:04 ` Ken Manheimer
2004-10-27 10:49 ` Richard Stallman
2004-10-28 4:39 ` Ken Manheimer
2004-11-02 15:48 ` Ken Manheimer
2004-11-07 3:37 ` Richard Stallman
2004-10-23 18:49 ` Richard Stallman
2004-10-23 19:53 ` John Paul Wallington
2004-10-23 18:49 ` Richard Stallman
2004-10-21 22:13 ` Luc Teirlinck
2004-10-23 4:48 ` Richard Stallman
2004-10-23 16:03 ` Luc Teirlinck
2004-10-18 8:32 ` Kim F. Storm
2004-10-17 16:07 ` Richard Stallman
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=m3fz58vx3l.fsf@kfs-l.imdomain.dk \
--to=storm@cua.dk \
--cc=emacs-devel@gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).