From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Chong Yidong Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93 Date: 26 Jan 2007 12:35:28 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87hcuia6c4.fsf@stupidchicken.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1169832953 25134 80.91.229.12 (26 Jan 2007 17:35:53 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2007 17:35:53 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Juanma Barranquero" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jan 26 18:35:42 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 1HAUzF-00036q-S5 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 26 Jan 2007 18:35:42 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HAUzF-0000uo-D9 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 26 Jan 2007 12:35:41 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HAUz5-0000uI-RS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Jan 2007 12:35:31 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HAUz5-0000tz-J6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Jan 2007 12:35:31 -0500 Original-Received: from biscayne-one-station.mit.edu ([18.7.7.80]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA:32) (Exim 4.52) id 1HAUz5-0007do-8L; Fri, 26 Jan 2007 12:35:31 -0500 Original-Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (OUTGOING-AUTH.MIT.EDU [18.7.22.103]) by biscayne-one-station.mit.edu (8.13.6/8.9.2) with ESMTP id l0QHZTrj025517; Fri, 26 Jan 2007 12:35:29 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from m12-182-10.mit.edu (M12-182-10.MIT.EDU [18.19.0.41]) (authenticated bits=56) (User authenticated as cyd@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.13.6/8.12.4) with ESMTP id l0QHZSuv017463 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 26 Jan 2007 12:35:29 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: (from cyd@localhost) by m12-182-10.mit.edu (8.12.9.20060308) id l0QHZSCI009266; Fri, 26 Jan 2007 12:35:28 -0500 In-Reply-To: Original-Lines: 40 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.4 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.42 X-Spam-Score: 0.00 X-detected-kernel: Solaris 9.1 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:65495 Archived-At: "Juanma Barranquero" writes: > On 1/26/07, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > 4 pretest tarballs is not too many, I think. > > No, of course not. I'm more worried by the month-long interval between > pretests than the number of them. The main reason for this is that Richard has, in the past, insisted on eliminating outstanding bugs before starting a new pretest. So I have waited for the items in FOR-RELEASE items to be depleted before rolling a new tarball. There is certainly no difficulty for me to roll a tarball every week if we decide on that. > No, of course not. I'm more worried by the month-long interval between > pretests than the number of them. 30 days is enough for us to grow > restless and leave us susceptible to featurettes posing as > bug-fixes... (I have this mental image of us developers like the guys > in Starship Troopers, surrounded by nasty, mean-looking bugs.) If we were to release Emacs 22 right now, it would already be much more polished than the average free software release. Personally, I think that at this point, getting 5 years of accumulated crash and data-corruption bugfixes into users' hands is more important that scraping through the remaining handful of niggly bugs left in the code---that ought to be what 22.2 is for. But we've been through this discussion before. > > during the pretest of Emacs 21, > > I think many pretesters would send email short time after another > > pretest was tarred, saying they have the new version up and running. > > Perhaps we should ask them to provide this information now. > > Agreed. One problem is Richard's time-lag. He has to receive my email through emacs-devel about the pretest tarball, then send the email to the pretesters list, which usually takes several days. I could send out the pretest email directly if that makes things easier.