From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Francesco Potorti` Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: No calc in pretest? Date: 01 Jul 2002 23:32:49 +0200 Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <87pty7t9q6.fsf@pot.cnuce.cnr.it> References: <200206300644.g5U6irvR010148@adams0-57.reshall.ou.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1025559374 23237 127.0.0.1 (1 Jul 2002 21:36:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 21:36:14 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , burton@openprivacy.org, Emacs Devel Mailing List Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 17P8qE-00062g-00 for ; Mon, 01 Jul 2002 23:36:14 +0200 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 17P8uw-0006Zz-00 for ; Mon, 01 Jul 2002 23:41:07 +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 17P8q4-00030k-00; Mon, 01 Jul 2002 17:36:04 -0400 Original-Received: from pot.cnuce.cnr.it ([146.48.83.182]) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 17P8nG-0002X7-00 for ; Mon, 01 Jul 2002 17:33:10 -0400 Original-Received: from pot by pot.cnuce.cnr.it with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17P8mv-0003KM-00; Mon, 01 Jul 2002 23:32:49 +0200 Original-To: Jon Cast In-Reply-To: <200206300644.g5U6irvR010148@adams0-57.reshall.ou.edu> Original-Lines: 13 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2.90 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:5296 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:5296 Jon Cast writes: Is there any chance y'all could be persuaded to number releases in a way that'll make it obvious what's a bug fix and what's a release from CVS head? (I.e., 21.4 -- Release from CVS 21.4.1 -- Bug-fix 21.4.2 -- Bug-fix 21.4.50 -- CVS 21.5 -- Release from CVS I agree that this scheme or any other clear numbering scheme should be adopted to distinguish bug-fix only releases.