From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Philip Kaludercic Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#55039: [PATCH] Use VC-relative file names in ChangeLog entries Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2022 08:16:38 +0000 Message-ID: <875yhul40p.fsf@posteo.net> References: <8735i7zvk4.fsf@posteo.net> <83v8v3sq0n.fsf@gnu.org> <87czc8u56q.fsf@gnus.org> <871qsooenn.fsf@posteo.net> <87o7vsfu5p.fsf@posteo.net> <83y1uwijzt.fsf@gnu.org> <87bkrsdzzm.fsf@posteo.net> <83mtbafip7.fsf@gnu.org> <87sfl26ypw.fsf@posteo.net> <87lequ3w20.fsf@gnus.org> <878rmuxdmg.fsf@gmail.com> <87bkrq3v13.fsf@gnus.org> <8735d26npz.fsf@posteo.net> <87wnae2fz8.fsf@gnus.org> <87y1uu58p8.fsf@posteo.net> <87h71i2ffh.fsf@gnus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="40884"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Eli Zaretskii , 55039@debbugs.gnu.org, Visuwesh To: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Sep 11 10:17:20 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1oXI9X-000ANO-Mf for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 11 Sep 2022 10:17:19 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56264 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oXI9W-0000xS-08 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 11 Sep 2022 04:17:18 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:41142) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oXI9G-0000xJ-QM for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 11 Sep 2022 04:17:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:51989) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oXI9G-0001kW-5Z for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 11 Sep 2022 04:17:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1oXI9F-0004c0-Mo for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 11 Sep 2022 04:17:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Philip Kaludercic Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2022 08:17:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 55039 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: moreinfo patch Original-Received: via spool by 55039-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B55039.166288421117707 (code B ref 55039); Sun, 11 Sep 2022 08:17:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 55039) by debbugs.gnu.org; 11 Sep 2022 08:16:51 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40688 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1oXI94-0004bX-Gf for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 11 Sep 2022 04:16:50 -0400 Original-Received: from mout01.posteo.de ([185.67.36.65]:46923) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1oXI92-0004bJ-Qh for 55039@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 11 Sep 2022 04:16:49 -0400 Original-Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC71E240029 for <55039@debbugs.gnu.org>; Sun, 11 Sep 2022 10:16:42 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1662884202; bh=siqe7zKKdPD/4kTAbrfvYOK7I5EDr5+uts47CZjm5dg=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Autocrypt:Date:From; b=YhyrHRYIGA/HU893531mnJ5FCcJsU8XSGWOKEqPsTQieW9XLBXkPiPIdXIJYMourM d2NJp3rOoYm0+PTLLKBx2Jm834eKusDdjQuuevEyPpQfbkQnJNm+GW9DTjSVk194yL TWePyOomAdJtKCtsqhprWbTSZU1Wa9eESfGy5fouS1MQjYNkgPCrwpAmtKGEbI5HK0 JjJK+f7Jqek8cd+WHELl2CXy5IC4T26FDBBr6QNlHRJae3jKGA0QWN4SX5iNzeuf7X /GAGhPD2BOjhCoZfeUN47dHmc5zuC+GwX+ReKvVq6U54YwBV1Zg5tnkFjTjgV92Hde zlaTand0oGOFA== Original-Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4MQMyK4Nrvz6tmd; Sun, 11 Sep 2022 10:16:38 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <87h71i2ffh.fsf@gnus.org> (Lars Ingebrigtsen's message of "Thu, 08 Sep 2022 14:56:02 +0200") Autocrypt: addr=philipk@posteo.net; prefer-encrypt=nopreference; keydata= mDMEYHHqUhYJKwYBBAHaRw8BAQdAp3GdmYJ6tm5McweY6dEvIYIiry+Oz9rU4MH6NHWK0Ee0QlBo aWxpcCBLYWx1ZGVyY2ljIChnZW5lcmF0ZWQgYnkgYXV0b2NyeXB0LmVsKSA8cGhpbGlwa0Bwb3N0 ZW8ubmV0PoiQBBMWCAA4FiEEDM2H44ZoPt9Ms0eHtVrAHPRh1FwFAmBx6lICGwMFCwkIBwIGFQoJ CAsCBBYCAwECHgECF4AACgkQtVrAHPRh1FyTkgEAjlbGPxFchvMbxzAES3r8QLuZgCxeAXunM9gh io0ePtUBALVhh9G6wIoZhl0gUCbQpoN/UJHI08Gm1qDob5zDxnIHuDgEYHHqUhIKKwYBBAGXVQEF AQEHQNcRB+MUimTMqoxxMMUERpOR+Q4b1KgncDZkhrO2ql1tAwEIB4h4BBgWCAAgFiEEDM2H44Zo Pt9Ms0eHtVrAHPRh1FwFAmBx6lICGwwACgkQtVrAHPRh1Fw1JwD/Qo7kvtib8jy7puyWrSv0MeTS g8qIxgoRWJE/KKdkCLEA/jb9b9/g8nnX+UcwHf/4VfKsjExlnND3FrBviXUW6NcB X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:242127 Archived-At: Lars Ingebrigtsen writes: > Philip Kaludercic writes: > >> In that case I am confused, if >> >> ;; boundp foo-bar: t >> >> is backwards-compatible it appears preferable. > > Now I'm confused! I'm not sure how you can be confused by a request for > information? Never mind, I had misread the thread. It appears that if backwards-compatibility is of importance, an additional section would be necessary. Perhaps this could also be used as an opportunity to update how buffer local variables are specified in general. Are there any other issues that are known besides this one? Robert Pluim writes: >>>>>> On Thu, 08 Sep 2022 12:53:07 +0000, Philip Kaludercic said: > > Philip> Lars Ingebrigtsen writes: > >> Philip Kaludercic writes: > >> > >>>> But is that backwards-compatible? > >>> ^ typo? > >> > >> No? > >> > >>> If you meant incompatible, it is any more or less incompatible than > >>> adding the boundp to the end of the line? > >> > >> It was a question -- I wouldn't have asked if I knew what the answer > >> was. > > Philip> In that case I am confused, if > > Philip> ;; boundp foo-bar: t > > Philip> is backwards-compatible it appears preferable. > > File mode specification error: (user-error Malformed local variable line: "boundp foo-bar: t") > > Robert