From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#7494: 24.0.50; Why is `prefix-region' in a library by itself? Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2010 08:11:01 -0800 Message-ID: References: <5CD13207D93D40739A6E3AB9B3733186@us.oracle.com> <831v676vdl.fsf@gnu.org> 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 1290874507 9958 80.91.229.12 (27 Nov 2010 16:15:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2010 16:15:07 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 7494@debbugs.gnu.org To: "'Eli Zaretskii'" Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Nov 27 17:14:59 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PMNQP-0007y9-E9 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 27 Nov 2010 17:14:58 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57494 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PMNQO-0006ET-JM for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 27 Nov 2010 11:14:56 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=38645 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PMNQJ-0006EE-Qj for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 27 Nov 2010 11:14:52 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PMNQI-0007qk-Ov for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 27 Nov 2010 11:14:51 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:45321) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PMNQI-0007qg-MB for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 27 Nov 2010 11:14:50 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PMNHm-0001pp-Ap; Sat, 27 Nov 2010 11:06:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: "Drew Adams" Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: owner@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2010 16:06:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 7494 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 7494-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B7494.12908739527036 (code B ref 7494); Sat, 27 Nov 2010 16:06:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 7494) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Nov 2010 16:05:52 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PMNHb-0001pQ-OE for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 27 Nov 2010 11:05:52 -0500 Original-Received: from rcsinet10.oracle.com ([148.87.113.121]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PMNHZ-0001pA-KK for 7494@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 27 Nov 2010 11:05:50 -0500 Original-Received: from rcsinet15.oracle.com (rcsinet15.oracle.com [148.87.113.117]) by rcsinet10.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.2) with ESMTP id oARGBGU8010471 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Sat, 27 Nov 2010 16:11:17 GMT Original-Received: from acsmt354.oracle.com (acsmt354.oracle.com [141.146.40.154]) by rcsinet15.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.1) with ESMTP id oARE3oVH026983; Sat, 27 Nov 2010 16:11:16 GMT Original-Received: from abhmt017.oracle.com by acsmt355.oracle.com with ESMTP id 809555001290874254; Sat, 27 Nov 2010 08:10:54 -0800 Original-Received: from dradamslap1 (/10.159.217.122) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Sat, 27 Nov 2010 08:10:53 -0800 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: <831v676vdl.fsf@gnu.org> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5994 Thread-Index: AcuOCitzuhg0x9F8Qn2hEysdi5DMRAAQf4qw X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2010 11:06:02 -0500 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:41928 Archived-At: > > You are certainly very quick when it doesn't count. ;-) > > It's unfair to post such comments. You are silly to jump on such a comment (with a kidding smily yet!) as if it were a nasty complaint or criticism. For the record, I do not consider Stefan to act quickly only on bug reports that are unimportant. > The time it takes to respond to a bug report depends on any number of > factors, including (but not limited to) the maintainer's understanding > of the Emacs area where the bug happens, the time it takes to > reproduce the problem, the amount of free time (holidays etc.), you > name it. In this case, I'm guessing that it took about a few seconds > to find out that there's no such code anywhere in Emacs. And I, for my part, would have closed the mistaken report sooner than within 6 minutes, if I had had a bug number to close. As soon as I posted the bug report I realized my mistake, but I had to wait until the bug showed up at http://debbugs.gnu.org/ to get the number. I specifically went to that site instead of waiting for the confirmation mail with the bug number (which takes even longer), in order to shorten the time before closing. IOW, I closed the bug as quickly as I knew how.