From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stefan Monnier" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: No calc in pretest? Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 15:17:40 -0400 Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <200207021917.g62JHe419454@rum.cs.yale.edu> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1025637528 7599 127.0.0.1 (2 Jul 2002 19:18:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 19:18:48 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Simon Josefsson , Emacs Devel Mailing List Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 17PTAm-0001yS-00 for ; Tue, 02 Jul 2002 21:18:48 +0200 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 17PTFw-0002Nu-00 for ; Tue, 02 Jul 2002 21:24:08 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 17PTA7-000595-00; Tue, 02 Jul 2002 15:18:07 -0400 Original-Received: from rum.cs.yale.edu ([128.36.229.169]) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 17PT9q-00057p-00 for ; Tue, 02 Jul 2002 15:17:50 -0400 Original-Received: (from monnier@localhost) by rum.cs.yale.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g62JHe419454; Tue, 2 Jul 2002 15:17:40 -0400 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.4 06/23/2000 with nmh-1.0.4 Original-To: Eli Zaretskii Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:5340 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:5340 > > One reason is that we don't have to update :version fields and > > documentation if there is a well defined versioning scheme. > > I sincerely doubt that the version-update problem will go away with > _any_ versioning scheme. It will "go away" if the versioning scheme ensures that the version number of a release can be determined long before the release happens (i.e. is independent of any other release that might happen in the mean time). Stefan