From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stephen Berman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Another todo-mode bug fix, ok for emacs-25? Date: Wed, 04 May 2016 19:46:27 +0200 Message-ID: <87eg9h7m30.fsf@gmx.net> References: <87inyt7wls.fsf@gmx.net> <83zis5j1gw.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1462384052 18509 80.91.229.3 (4 May 2016 17:47:32 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 4 May 2016 17:47:32 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed May 04 19:47:23 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1ay0tO-0002xE-9Q for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 04 May 2016 19:47:22 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:49437 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ay0tK-0001Lx-9c for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 04 May 2016 13:47:18 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59903) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ay0tA-00013F-Mm for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 04 May 2016 13:47:14 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ay0sz-0000CX-0e for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 04 May 2016 13:47:03 -0400 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.18]:58879) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ay0sn-0008W9-Jg; Wed, 04 May 2016 13:46:45 -0400 Original-Received: from rosalinde ([89.245.97.70]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx003) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MEWkb-1are0o3sQj-00FioS; Wed, 04 May 2016 19:46:28 +0200 In-Reply-To: <83zis5j1gw.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Wed, 04 May 2016 18:18:39 +0300") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.93 (gnu/linux) X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:F6cRbbD+i9hamVwRItnjmAjpXOXmA0fUcyRbjr3CLCpa9/qnZVn MlTA07FibQtBdjoIyVGnlWufd8pOxZOuFdCr/5uGvnGZDSVOF4gFDn9S6lSdZ/S/p4Z7mYC XPisfJ5tTvDW6Dm3uND1cYtvNU07mrcGNnjKVxss8i2dOg8Cbjd5fxyv1ZdTgErES41R9Hn k74LnDIdtTyHSL/nG+Pbg== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:dKp1INbJAuY=:fHPl2cfp8TB2+zfoXexZin 0EotNeCqXsu8TSpEcZln+4Bn3s2siQZFoyPwJ37dj4sP6QfByY/wu1d2REz5/Cfo0b5cd9JHC q1AiIb7zC47KiwwBD9WTf2bFqRag/rKIDxD22eIsVkkj23BCYPCCtMl64SRdCLutjEm/CprZy eRZz9x073+9JbglKHAaDWaD1999noN7nB+cnC/KUx2VpLjYuCZOflvHdzrzTYdGkF0LK5yJZ9 5b8JQDTvb39ti/LJDx4Vlb01ToZ5B6AI2XLW6KfxGtF78Vvn3FRTwc7UH6Lk7gDG/d2IJUaIK 2nts1/1VjeXiZJSuCCJOKfk2EK5PXDdGb0FzSehVeI5tyQRLN5a6GwSh26ovjDyVNTfSPt568 LlXzQPYUtnAniZRw8vJsrk+vxVvOrF9viHWiYFtv2BvAN8WkeGJHPVEWehdwGxN7weQRRyh8i HHKbzr24jYc1lwe8du+Bh25HcdkHdu0CBRvKEEEG5kkpy6PrqGYXfQxIcNx7bnB1QZjK04uUz fVDkghS374edPFzgXo29OH0vJ+NWCFzScne0xIve5o/VhaS/Ld/EsP1FHv6+FdfsIK8Cv+v1G ytymI6AX4OGsrfzMdblYSfDaPeqfKAe9MU0Evuet0ocAMH3d4eRHwiTkS/h2KI/CtBtKfphGg p8eaJcvNXzLDk69iAdEiqKfq9/DIpR/T+980Md/cEsFAARJpbDni/lXm2gNlNLSGolrbBnlJO SoRkzITQRSjtMZk6SNuAiV0vRVuiQPADUxb18dtoN1WAfCs6DaLyTgrj2/TA/6XlSG2BUFV7 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 212.227.15.18 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:203587 Archived-At: On Wed, 04 May 2016 18:18:39 +0300 Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> From: Stephen Berman >> Date: Wed, 04 May 2016 15:59:11 +0200 >> >> In bug#23447 I show how to reproduce a todo-mode bug I encountered >> involving archived items and provide a fix for it. The bug does not >> result in data loss or file corruption, but changes the behavior of >> todo-show in a way that can only be repaired by resetting internal >> variables or unloading and reloading todo-mode.el. The patch has no >> effect outside of todo-mode, and I've tested all uses of the function >> involved within todo-mode and encountered no problems, so is it all >> right for me to commit the fix to emacs-25? > > We don't want to release Emacs 25.1 with a buggy todo-mode, so the > fact the change is local helps, but not enough. Please try to > convince us that the change itself is safe. For example, is the > affected code called in different use cases than the one you anted to > fix, and if so, did you make sure those other use cases still work OK? The code changes are confined to the function todo-jump-to-category, which can be invoked interactively and is also called noninteractively from two other functions, todo-jump-to-archive-category and todo-insert-category-line. The last of these uses is what give rise to the bug, under the conditions given in the bug report (archived items, non-nil todo-skip-archived-categories). With the fix applied, I've also tested this use when these conditions are not met, and I've tested the other noninteractive use and the interactive uses (the command can be called not only within Todo mode but also from a non-Todo mode buffer). In all of my tests with the patched code, the behavior was as expected. Unfortunately, I don't have a test suite for todo-mode (I hope to develop one, but that's a long-term goal). Steve Berman