From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: It is time for a feature freeze (it is NOW or never). Date: 05 May 2004 01:49:12 +0200 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <87eks0654s.fsf@sno.mundell.ukfsn.org> <87n06bp4ng.fsf@sno.mundell.ukfsn.org> <8765cwkejr.fsf@mail.jurta.org> <200404071157.UAA25094@etlken.m17n.org> <200404071312.WAA25268@etlken.m17n.org> <87zn9nqras.fsf@emacswiki.org> <87hdvux5uz.fsf@orebokech.com> <87lll6v514.fsf@orebokech.com> <200404100109.KAA03816@etlken.m17n.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1083715182 28773 80.91.224.253 (4 May 2004 23:59:42 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 4 May 2004 23:59:42 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Wed May 05 01:59:34 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1BL9p0-0001Es-00 for ; Wed, 05 May 2004 01:59:34 +0200 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1BL9p0-0004tc-00 for ; Wed, 05 May 2004 01:59:34 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1BL9gi-00030E-8m for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Tue, 04 May 2004 19:51:00 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.30) id 1BL9fc-0002Vh-NU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 04 May 2004 19:49:52 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.30) id 1BL9f6-0002Gh-MZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 04 May 2004 19:49:51 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1BL9f6-0002Ga-86 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 04 May 2004 19:49:20 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([127.0.0.1] helo=lola.goethe.zz) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1BL9ez-0000Ck-Iw; Tue, 04 May 2004 19:49:14 -0400 Original-To: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) In-Reply-To: Original-Lines: 50 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3.50 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:22778 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:22778 storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) writes: > David Kastrup writes: > > > Richard Stallman writes: > > > > > I think we may as well skip making another release from RC. The > > > question is whether we should call the next release 21.4 or 22.0. > > > > > > There has been so much change that maybe the next release should be > > > 22.0. > > > > So in order to avoid version overkill, I think that we would stay at > > 21.x as long as we have "merely" extensive, but not fundamental > > changes. > > Well, there are SOME fundamental changes from 21.3 to "this" release: > > ** Leim is now part of the Emacs distribution. A difference in packaging is not fundamental. > ** The Emacs Lisp Reference Manual is now part of the distribution. A difference in packaging is not fundamental. > ** The max size of buffers and integers has been doubled. This is just a minor detail for the user. > ** GTK support Probably more relevant. Also image support has been extended to Mac and Windows, but I consider this more a bugfix than a feature enhancement: image support never was intended to be X-only. It was just a tolerated shortcoming in order to get something out. > Besides, a lot of external lisp packages are now included with emacs > (tramp, ses, cua, ...) A difference in packaging... but I repeat myself. It is convenient, but not fundamental. > But I don't really case if we call this 21.4, 21.5, or 22.0 -- as > long as we release something in 2004 !! Yes. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum