From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jon Cast Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: No calc in pretest? Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 16:04:05 -0500 Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <200207022104.g62L45T19411@d-ip-129-15-78-125.cs.ou.edu> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1025643956 23156 127.0.0.1 (2 Jul 2002 21:05:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 21:05:56 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , 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 17PUqS-00061K-00 for ; Tue, 02 Jul 2002 23:05:56 +0200 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 17PUve-0004v1-00 for ; Tue, 02 Jul 2002 23:11:18 +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 17PUqp-0006yc-00; Tue, 02 Jul 2002 17:06:19 -0400 Original-Received: from d-ip-129-15-78-125.cs.ou.edu ([129.15.78.125]) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 17PUp4-0006pg-00 for ; Tue, 02 Jul 2002 17:04:31 -0400 Original-Received: from ou.edu (jcast@localhost) by d-ip-129-15-78-125.cs.ou.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g62L45T19411; Tue, 2 Jul 2002 16:04:05 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: d-ip-129-15-78-125.cs.ou.edu: jcast owned process doing -bs Original-To: Stefan Monnier In-Reply-To: Message from Stefan Monnier of "Tue, 02 Jul 2002 15:17:40 EDT." <200207021917.g62JHe419454@rum.cs.yale.edu> 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:5371 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:5371 Stefan Monnier wrote: > > > 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). Which both schemes accomplish. > Stefan Jon Cast