From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: next emacs version? Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 14:23:03 -0700 Message-ID: <0E10B96B5C814EE8B95B57972F13E189@us.oracle.com> References: <56D10E2523764AC98D99CEBC55DBAD93@us.oracle.com> <83iq8sigyq.fsf@gnu.org> <83d3z0i3nu.fsf@gnu.org> <911BA1D06CEB4306924D0069BA2D3DFF@us.oracle.com> <83bpeki18a.fsf@gnu.org> <83aau4hv38.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1269033994 16280 80.91.229.12 (19 Mar 2010 21:26:34 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 21:26:34 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "'Eli Zaretskii'" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Mar 19 22:26:29 2010 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 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Nsji5-00081d-0B for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 22:26:25 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35612 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Nsji3-0000yn-QG for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 17:26:23 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Nsjgb-0008N8-0l for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 17:24:53 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=59290 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NsjgZ-0008MH-QG for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 17:24:52 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NsjgY-0007Rt-28 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 17:24:51 -0400 Original-Received: from acsinet12.oracle.com ([141.146.126.234]:37878) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NsjgX-0007Rk-Cn; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 17:24:50 -0400 Original-Received: from acsinet15.oracle.com (acsinet15.oracle.com [141.146.126.227]) by acsinet12.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.2) with ESMTP id o2JLOlAm027874 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 19 Mar 2010 21:24:48 GMT Original-Received: from acsmt353.oracle.com (acsmt353.oracle.com [141.146.40.153]) by acsinet15.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.1) with ESMTP id o2J9fWgl013653; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 21:24:46 GMT Original-Received: from abhmt008.oracle.com by acsmt355.oracle.com with ESMTP id 101528911269033783; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 14:23:03 -0700 Original-Received: from dradamslap1 (/24.5.179.75) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 14:23:03 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: <83aau4hv38.fsf@gnu.org> Thread-Index: AcrHqUCPb4RizNe+Qt2t7xD9tC2sRAAAIRxw X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 X-Source-IP: acsmt353.oracle.com [141.146.40.153] X-Auth-Type: Internal IP X-CT-RefId: str=0001.0A090203.4BA3EB9F.0086:SCFMA4539814,ss=1,fgs=0 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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:122314 Archived-At: > > OK. Where do you see such info (on the Web site)? > > [snipped info that is not about using the Web site] Again, anyone know how to get such info from the Web site? > > Won't some builds of 24.0.50.1 have the change and some not? > > No. The trunk was switched to 24.0.50 only after the 23.x release > branch was cut. So all development versions before that would have a > version 23.x.y, and all the versions after it will be 24.x.y. The > first officially released version that will have it will be 23.2. OK in this particular case, but the general question remains. If this change had been made in a 23.0.50.1 dev version (or whatever the nomenclature is), then some such dev versions would have the change and some would not.