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: Emacs 21.4 Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2005 23:42:12 +0100 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1107816340 10121 80.91.229.2 (7 Feb 2005 22:45:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 22:45:40 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Feb 07 23:45:40 2005 Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1CyHcm-00082k-Eb for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 23:44:56 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1CyHpH-0004oP-3T for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 17:57:51 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1CyHop-0004h7-V1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 17:57:24 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1CyHon-0004fz-UV for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 17:57:22 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1CyHon-0004fb-T9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 17:57:21 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CyHaH-0002ql-Pl for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 17:42:21 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lola.goethe.zz) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CyHWs-00041K-Li; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 17:38:51 -0500 Original-To: rms@gnu.org In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Mon, 07 Feb 2005 15:50:37 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/21.3.50 (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 X-MailScanner-To: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:33059 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:33059 Richard Stallman writes: > I have made an Emacs 21.4 release with a single security fix. We noticed. > So our coming release won't be 21.4. > > I now think it should be version 22. > It has plenty of new features. With regard to architectural features, we basically have GTK support under X, image/toolbar/whatever support under MacOS and Windows, Unicode in menus (though probably not consistent in all ports), definitely improved images (functionality/performance). Last time we were thinking about version numbers, I was in favor for calling the new branch release 22, partly to avoid a situation where important fixes mandated an interim release, partly to bring across the point that 21.4 would be nothing like 21.3. It is unfortunate that there has been _lots_ of talk in the mean time about what 21.4 will be, and references with "will work for Emacs >= 21.4" are on the web and software packages and manuals in hundredfold as can easily be verified by Google. So we'd better avoid this sort of thing in future if we can. What needs to be done now? a) 21.4 has to be announced on all relevant channels and people told that it contains a single security fix and not what people thought 21.4 would contain. This is also important because the documentation of Emacs-21.4 is not in any manner updated: people will think they were the victim of a hoax upon downloading/installing an Emacs-21.4 distribution if 21.4 does not get announced publicly soon. The distribution itself does not tell this too visibly. It may be a good idea to announce that the next _major_ release will be 22.1 after all. b) In the CVS version, the version number should likely get bumped to 22.0.50 instead of the current 21.3.50. There is no sense in making it 21.4.50, anyhow, and it would be quite misleading to have it stay at 21.3.50, lower than the current released version. c) all references to 21.4 need to be replaced by referring to 22.1 in our CVS. d) anybody speculating about version numbers for Emacsen having internal Unicode representation or multitty support must be gently but firmly locked into the freezer. e) get drunk. Personally, I volunteer to tackle task e) right now. With a vengeance. Anybody willing to tackle task d) should wait until I release the freezer. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum