From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dmitry Gutov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#13200: 24.1.50; Ruby Mode Indentation after Here Docs Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2012 06:12:01 +0400 Message-ID: <50D7B9F1.9030707@yandex.ru> References: <87hanmmf5u.fsf@saturn.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> <87a9t6kyho.wl%ded-law@ddoherty.net> <20693.65320.439193.221152@gnu.org> <87r4mgzuys.fsf@yandex.ru> <50D72C0A.2070508@yandex.ru> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1356315162 31541 80.91.229.3 (24 Dec 2012 02:12:42 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2012 02:12:42 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ded-law@ddoherty.net, 13200@debbugs.gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Dec 24 03:12:57 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1TmxXE-0003du-F3 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 24 Dec 2012 03:12:56 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:41962 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TmxX0-0002Ze-0g for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 23 Dec 2012 21:12:42 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:51920) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TmxWv-0002V1-Cc for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Dec 2012 21:12:40 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TmxWs-0007yY-V5 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Dec 2012 21:12:37 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:47020) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TmxWs-0007yT-RW for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Dec 2012 21:12:34 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TmxXK-0001Io-Cr for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Dec 2012 21:13:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Dmitry Gutov Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2012 02:13:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 13200 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 13200-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B13200.13563151524968 (code B ref 13200); Mon, 24 Dec 2012 02:13:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 13200) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Dec 2012 02:12:32 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57270 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TmxWq-0001I4-6h for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 23 Dec 2012 21:12:32 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-la0-f51.google.com ([209.85.215.51]:39591) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TmxWn-0001Hw-9g for 13200@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 23 Dec 2012 21:12:30 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-la0-f51.google.com with SMTP id e4so7980323lag.10 for <13200@debbugs.gnu.org>; Sun, 23 Dec 2012 18:12:00 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=3nf1rh0OwZCN1wayWki793+7/egxF0j2CT4ju0z8YMo=; b=uHPGydundor2hT6X5Nn94ATqESSIe4j0sXih5anXlE5j+BDqwGm9fSpVtTtz0IrNo0 8CqZuWS/t/BFvkVyC+RhEk9YZymUxEyt6p2P9qd38QoTINr+XWJYENAHtsfFLthRaqZo ZDIvDPOl+D6/ifYygybRbYuvNOi12HpWeaJXMijPXOcHPtnNViT2bqWcqUhhxM+CPySw paTYG95K9onNMGVz7qQh326eRGIgQ59LgSlbG3od5+8q3IlWly/+6bTLHJewKwA7Xh7u 3yPDx9J2C6ly3SxXwNjaIGKlShSSXQlXhm82anGsuvarCgD8G7/TPEFwLnw9mvrtfjrb 1h2g== X-Received: by 10.152.108.48 with SMTP id hh16mr18675934lab.25.1356315120308; Sun, 23 Dec 2012 18:12:00 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([178.252.98.87]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id ox6sm7246438lab.16.2012.12.23.18.11.58 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 23 Dec 2012 18:11:58 -0800 (PST) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 In-Reply-To: X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:68975 Archived-At: On 24.12.2012 4:49, Stefan Monnier wrote: >>>>> package.el should be able to ignore your "out of date" elpa version if >>>>> the bundled version is more recent, so it should work even if you don't >>>>> uninstall the elpa version. >>>> By ignore, do you mean it won't show up in the list of packages >>>> available to install? >>> No, I mean it should not be added to load-path during startup. >> That may add to the confusion in this case. "I installed ruby-mode 1.1, but >> it didn't do anything!", or something. > > No, because package.el wouldn't let you install 1.1 when you have 1.2 > bundled (at least, not without warning you). > > So this would only cause the downloaded package to be suddenly > superseded by the bundled package when you upgrade Emacs, which is The > Right Thing To Do. I see. That's good, then. >>>> Do you think we should bump it to 1.2? >>> Depends. Is it a fork? >> I meant, bump the version of the bundled ruby-mode. > > I understand this. But the question still stands: is the bundled > version really a more up-to-date version, or do we have a fork and there > are good reasons why someone would want to use the ELPA version over the > built-in one? > >> The "ruby-mode 1.1" doesn't contain any substantial changes, AFAICT, so >> there's nothing to merge. But it is present in both Marmalade and the >> original ELPA. > > Sounds like it's not a fork. So we should bump our version accordingly. May I do the bump in emacs24? >> I opened an issue at the repo of the Marmalade uploader >> (https://github.com/resure/ruby-mode/issues/1), and if that doesn't result >> in anything, I'll escalate to the current Marmalade maintainer. > > I'm not sure that there's a problem on their side. They also cater to > older Emacsen. You may be right.