From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Masatake YAMATO Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [Bashdb-devel] removing bushdb related code in gud.el Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 13:46:31 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <20070226.134631.101661928.jet@gyve.org> References: <20070226.024211.256833758.jet@gyve.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1172465231 14331 80.91.229.12 (26 Feb 2007 04:47:11 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 04:47:11 +0000 (UTC) Cc: bashdb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, rocky.bernstein@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Feb 26 05:47:04 2007 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 4.50) id 1HLXlQ-0003uX-DS for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 26 Feb 2007 05:47:04 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HLXlQ-0001IF-Fd for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 25 Feb 2007 23:47:04 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HLXlG-0001IA-5z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Feb 2007 23:46:54 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HLXlD-0001Hy-PR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Feb 2007 23:46:52 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HLXlD-0001Hv-J8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Feb 2007 23:46:51 -0500 Original-Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1HLXl9-0007Z9-0N; Sun, 25 Feb 2007 23:46:47 -0500 Original-Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l1Q4khIJ016796; Sun, 25 Feb 2007 23:46:43 -0500 Original-Received: from pobox.tokyo.redhat.com (pobox.tokyo.redhat.com [172.16.33.225]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l1Q4kfHK002768; Sun, 25 Feb 2007 23:46:42 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost (dhcp92.tokyo.redhat.com [172.16.33.92]) by pobox.tokyo.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id l1Q4kceS005173; Mon, 26 Feb 2007 13:46:40 +0900 In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Mew version 4.2.53 on Emacs 22.0.51 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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:66825 Archived-At: > To avoid users' confusion, we'd like to move bashdb related code(bashdb.el) > in gud.el to bashdb itself. So we can provide well updated bashdb.el in > bashdb release. > > Wouldn't it be better to have a protocol version number? > Then Emacs could still have the code, but if you change the protocol, > you would update the protocol version number. Then the code in Emacs > would say "you need to install bashdb.el from . Either bundling bashdb related code to gud.el or not, generally introducing the protocol version number is good idea. This point is that we should not add new code for enhancement till releasing new version. Masatake YAMATO