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: Wed, 03 Jul 2002 18:08:13 -0500 Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <200207032308.g63N8Dm23075@d-ip-129-15-78-125.cs.ou.edu> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1025737743 6271 127.0.0.1 (3 Jul 2002 23:09:03 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 23:09:03 +0000 (UTC) Cc: rms@gnu.org, storm@cua.dk, pot@gnu.org, eliz@is.elta.co.il, burton@openprivacy.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 17PtF9-0001d2-00 for ; Thu, 04 Jul 2002 01:09:03 +0200 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 17PtKr-0006fG-00 for ; Thu, 04 Jul 2002 01:14:58 +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 17PtFC-0001Qn-00; Wed, 03 Jul 2002 19:09:06 -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 17PtEa-0001O0-00; Wed, 03 Jul 2002 19:08:28 -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 g63N8Dm23075; Wed, 3 Jul 2002 18:08:14 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: d-ip-129-15-78-125.cs.ou.edu: jcast owned process doing -bs Original-To: Miles Bader In-Reply-To: Message from Miles Bader of "Thu, 04 Jul 2002 07:03:42 +0900." <8765zwii4h.fsf@tc-1-100.kawasaki.gol.ne.jp> 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:5430 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:5430 Miles Bader wrote: > Jon Cast writes: > > > It would perhaps be logical to use negative minor-minor version > > > numbers. I wonder if that would break anything. We could try > > > it. > > I think this is a good idea. The only question is what > > minor/micro version number CVS versions should have under this > > scheme---the minor number of the following version and a negative > > micro number, or the minor number of the preceding version and a > > high micro number. Hmm. > I assumed he meant the former, e.g. 21.4.-2.x would always be a CVS > version and 21.4.-1.y would always be a prelease (or something). This sounds reasonable. > By the latter, I assume you meant e.g. 21.4.0.-x and having -X count > `up towards 0'. The disadvantage of that is you have to pick a very > high X to avoid inadvertantly hitting 0 before you're ready... No, by the latter I meant making the CVS preceding 21.5 21.3.50 and making the pre-tests for 21.5 21.5.-10 (or some-such). In other words, should we change the version numbers for both CVS and pre-tests, or just for pre-tests. > -Miles Jon Cast