From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: Pretest Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 14:13:33 -0700 Message-ID: References: <87fwjsqs9l.fsf@stupidchicken.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1316466828 15211 80.91.229.12 (19 Sep 2011 21:13:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 21:13:48 +0000 (UTC) To: "'Chong Yidong'" , Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Sep 19 23:13:43 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 1R5l9q-0007xh-Kl for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 23:13:42 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51267 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R5l9q-0004j9-2m for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 17:13:42 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:51283) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R5l9n-0004j0-BE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 17:13:40 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R5l9m-0007wa-An for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 17:13:39 -0400 Original-Received: from rcsinet15.oracle.com ([148.87.113.117]:54074) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R5l9m-0007wP-4K for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 17:13:38 -0400 Original-Received: from acsinet22.oracle.com (acsinet22.oracle.com [141.146.126.238]) by rcsinet15.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.4/Switch-3.4.4) with ESMTP id p8JLDYHS001424 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 19 Sep 2011 21:13:36 GMT Original-Received: from acsmt357.oracle.com (acsmt357.oracle.com [141.146.40.157]) by acsinet22.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p8JLDXLg025527 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 19 Sep 2011 21:13:34 GMT Original-Received: from abhmt120.oracle.com (abhmt120.oracle.com [141.146.116.72]) by acsmt357.oracle.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id p8JLDSTn007104; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 16:13:28 -0500 Original-Received: from dradamslap1 (/130.35.178.194) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 14:13:28 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 Thread-Index: Acx2/VKC2qcmgEv1RgmdiMHdhuC7vQADUvpw In-Reply-To: <87fwjsqs9l.fsf@stupidchicken.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109 X-Source-IP: acsinet22.oracle.com [141.146.126.238] X-Auth-Type: Internal IP X-CT-RefId: str=0001.0A090205.4E77B080.0061:SCFMA922111,ss=1,re=-4.000,fgs=0 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 1) X-Received-From: 148.87.113.117 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:144109 Archived-At: > Unless something comes up, I would like to make the first pretest this > Sunday, the 25th. Please plan your commits accordingly; thanks. Are you kidding? Or did you perhaps mean Sunday, Nov 25, 2012 (that sounds more like it)? After Martin relentlessly and carefully worked out the bugs from his humongous, many-faceted, and detailed buffer-display changes, you suddenly changed it all again (recently). And during a feature freeze, no less. Even Martin (our resident window/buffer-display expert) has admitted that he does not yet understand the new code. Does that count as "something coming up"? How much design, development, and testing time did you put into the new design, compared to the hundreds of hours (perhaps 100s of days?) that Martin spent on his approach? I'm not defending or attacking either design (I was OK with the Emacs 18-23 one). I'm just asking about the relative effort and care expressed, as one possible measure of how fully baked this might be. There has hardly been time to collect reports of the fallout, let alone attempt to repair the damage from this change. I've had the experience of only one Windows build with the new approach, and there have been code changes since that build. I immediately filed one bug - but got no reply to it of any substance (http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=9532#11). Think, for contrast, how long you let people digest the lex-bind changes... And AFAICT there is still no user-understandable doc explaining simply and clearly how to use the new system and how to map pre-Emacs-24 behavior and preferences to it. Not to mention a clear presentation of the changes in NEWS. (Is there even an UNclear one? All I see is "FIXME: buffer-display-alist changes"). I thought the decision about this (user-unrequested) feature was that we were going to _take the time to get it right_. Two nano-seconds after a sudden design change you want to start pretest? Bad.