From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Suggestion to indicate fixed version when closing a bug Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 02:37:48 +0900 Message-ID: <87r50bypoz.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> References: <83d3bwn7mu.fsf@gnu.org> <5dhb18p7i7.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <834nx8mcud.fsf@gnu.org> <83y5ukkucx.fsf@gnu.org> <87mxb05dk7.fsf@floss.red-bean.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1323625096 26389 80.91.229.12 (11 Dec 2011 17:38:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2011 17:38:16 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Karl Fogel Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Dec 11 18:38:12 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RZnLn-00044q-JE for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 11 Dec 2011 18:38:11 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56790 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RZnLk-0003Lx-4A for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 11 Dec 2011 12:38:08 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:34934) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RZnLg-0003CQ-H8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 11 Dec 2011 12:38:05 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RZnLf-0001TO-Ft for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 11 Dec 2011 12:38:04 -0500 Original-Received: from mgmt2.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp ([130.158.97.224]:46752) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RZnLd-0001Sq-J7; Sun, 11 Dec 2011 12:38:01 -0500 Original-Received: from uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp [130.158.99.156]) by mgmt2.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 011989707D0; Mon, 12 Dec 2011 02:37:49 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000) id EE8F81A2766; Mon, 12 Dec 2011 02:37:48 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: <87mxb05dk7.fsf@floss.red-bean.com> X-Mailer: VM 8.2.0a1 under 21.5 (beta31) "ginger" 2dbefd79b3d3 XEmacs Lucid (x86_64-unknown-linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 130.158.97.224 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:146650 Archived-At: Karl Fogel writes: > Glenn Morris writes: > >It's just my opinion that is is useful and not much effort. > >Maybe just use "24.1", rather than worrying about pretest versions, if > >you don't think it is very useful. > > Oh, I totally misunderstood what you were proposing, Glenn, sorry. > > You meant the version number ("edition", "release", whatever) of Emacs > in which the bug was fixed, not revision information about the change > that fixed it. > > The latter is what I've been (mistakenly) talking about in this thread; > I'll shut up now, as I have no strong opinion about including the > version number, though I'll try to remember to do it. I'm rarely aware > of what Emacs version I'm running, since I'm just building from bzr. IIUUC, that's not when Glenn is talking about either. In order to do what Glenn wants you need to think about what series your patch is being applied to. I think this is impossible in general, in fact; you don't know whether your patch will be ported to other branches, for example, or whether that will be done as a merge or a new commit. This information will show up in the VCS log output in merge commits (if the merger thinks to do it), but anybody who is looking at VCS log output doesn't need this information in the log message. I'm with Eli; hard to do well, and even if you're trying pretty hard, it will be error-prone.