From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Kyle Meyer Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel,gmane.emacs.orgmode Subject: Re: Sync up the org in emacs master to org maint branch? Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 10:39:40 -0500 Message-ID: <87r33psudf.fsf@kyleam.com> References: <87a8afaxlz.fsf@gmx.us> <83fuk63mq5.fsf@gnu.org> <874m0maq9e.fsf@gmx.us> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1485445266 17834 195.159.176.226 (26 Jan 2017 15:41:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 15:41:06 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux) Cc: emacs-org list , Stefan Monnier , Rasmus , Emacs developers To: Kaushal Modi Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jan 26 16:41:01 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cWmAD-0002u9-Ro for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 26 Jan 2017 16:40:42 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39421 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cWmAJ-000823-4I for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 26 Jan 2017 10:40:47 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38969) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cWm9T-0007O9-8b for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Jan 2017 10:39:59 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cWm9O-0006MR-G4 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Jan 2017 10:39:55 -0500 Original-Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:57530 helo=sasl.smtp.pobox.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cWm9O-0006MC-9A; Thu, 26 Jan 2017 10:39:50 -0500 Original-Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E59060997; Thu, 26 Jan 2017 10:39:49 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=Xwr1beWxVXJ1B8h2TJfRiH/fxVE=; b=IOSQJQ 7PN2H/Rqt5Z2E+Xq3Vd8tdnFsBraLf2sL7CQzvyYvTKr5Q0/WS0S0aygUpKbE3ES H9qxl4y/kGH+c2uIjZPK62dOcK2a2DaFNQtsREg3Gv7NbPotsGDnUfogP1AtduKG XYgNT9F4e0RvqioNThN99V9r6vFKeuSrhk8CY= Original-Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9560960996; Thu, 26 Jan 2017 10:39:49 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from localhost (unknown [130.132.173.74]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 120C560994; Thu, 26 Jan 2017 10:39:49 -0500 (EST) X-Attribution: Kyle In-Reply-To: (Kaushal Modi's message of "Thu, 26 Jan 2017 15:01:26 +0000") X-Pobox-Relay-ID: ABCC17DA-E3DD-11E6-9B97-A7617B1B28F4-24757444!pb-smtp2.pobox.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=kyleam.com; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:content-type; s=mesmtp; bh=Xwr1beWxVXJ1B8h2TJfRiH/fxVE=; b=KO83HHxhaANE3DPZ+QWAnSylIQ644kb3sgrS1+H7UlulFj3EhSvTMHaR29vmSXXZvUt+eSSPRPcFC8IPEtr7FwesPyh5N5ca7rIFbQ+bM2rtrWHbvG60FqXVjvb6ddn867IEpivaQSmzvR2NCnlJGpOOPNIeck0F9k7VtLwEnkk= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 64.147.108.71 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:211617 gmane.emacs.orgmode:111704 Archived-At: Kaushal Modi writes: > On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 1:19 AM Kyle Meyer wrote: > >> We'd want at least one more release from maint, I think, so that'd be >> 9.0.5. > > Would it be OK to sync the current stable 9.0.4, I don't think that's a good idea. Since 9.0.4, I've backported one remaining commit from Emacs, I've adjusted :version in defcustoms to the appropriate version for a sync targeting Emacs's master, and I've cleaned up the spacing in a few places so that all the files pass Emacs's pre-commit check. > and keep on updating with each stable release as time comes? Yes, that should be done. > We never know, we might end up with even higher stable releases by the > time emacs 26.1 is released. I suspect we will, given that 9.0.1 -> 9.0.4 have all been released since this November. -- Kyle