From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Juanma Barranquero Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: GnuTLS for W32 Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2012 03:36:38 +0100 Message-ID: References: <83boqkr9bp.fsf@gnu.org> <874nwcu17i.fsf@wanadoo.es> <834nwcr6un.fsf@gnu.org> <87vcosskhc.fsf@wanadoo.es> <831urgr2yr.fsf@gnu.org> <87r4zgsh2w.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87ipks3zbo.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87boqk3q69.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87aa634st8.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87fwfvsgfv.fsf@wanadoo.es> <877h17scdo.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87hb0b77nr.fsf@lifelogs.com> <8739bvs27m.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87lipnqdhy.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87d3ayrjrk.fsf@wanadoo.es> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1325731050 12102 80.91.229.12 (5 Jan 2012 02:37:30 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2012 02:37:30 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: =?UTF-8?Q?=C3=93scar_Fuentes?= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jan 05 03:37:26 2012 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 1RidCn-000252-5y for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 05 Jan 2012 03:37:25 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:43434 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RidCm-0004U0-Ob for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 04 Jan 2012 21:37:24 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:47749) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RidCk-0004Tk-RN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jan 2012 21:37:23 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RidCj-0005nH-Qn for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jan 2012 21:37:22 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-pw0-f41.google.com ([209.85.160.41]:59235) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RidCj-0005nA-MB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jan 2012 21:37:21 -0500 Original-Received: by pbdd2 with SMTP id d2so114837pbd.0 for ; Wed, 04 Jan 2012 18:37:20 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ZaG/5141itqqQFcePQq3Wso5wRIYCfTKziGbcIEW1C0=; b=iaqQum5Mj4R+8fXoe1PXEnZvi/ko4thNRb9Uiqalxmq5i6MY8XZT4vjY5ddAFGXHmA nN+q+8qOTvNq+UCgFwHWGk67ANPoPZ4pjvC4Tq7+w7YsBLp5OYBoyUA4dbgMPGof4L4e JzXX5Gvfhxzfj30mYen/Wzo6WDvRCjusY3zK4= Original-Received: by 10.68.73.68 with SMTP id j4mr757238pbv.40.1325731040169; Wed, 04 Jan 2012 18:37:20 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.142.247.28 with HTTP; Wed, 4 Jan 2012 18:36:38 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <87d3ayrjrk.fsf@wanadoo.es> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Received-From: 209.85.160.41 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:147307 Archived-At: On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 03:00, =C3=93scar Fuentes wrote: > It *also* means that depending on unknown third parties is asking for > trouble. Yes. Unknown. > AFAIK Windows binaries are distributed from the GNU servers just because > someone volunteers to do the job, not because it is a requisite for the > release. The binary tarballs for Windows are more or less "blessed". They are not a requisite for the release, because strictly speaking, nothing Windows-related is a requisite for the release (I suppose an exception would be fixing bugs related to data loss or security issues). > So it should be up to those volunteers to decide if they want > to include those libraries (GnuTLS, image support, etc) on the binary > package. The moment the packages are accesible from the official site, there's certain responsibilities. For example, to issue security upgrades as fast as possible. > A slightly different issue is to decide if changes to Emacs sources are > allowed to do that chore on certain way, but then it is up to the > volunteers again and solid reasons should be given to reject those > contributions. So far, none of the ways that had been proposed has been convincing, and solid reasons have been given against them. It's just that we are not agreeing on what "solid reasons" mean. As far as I'm concerned, using ELPA to distribute Windows DLLs is gross beyond description, for example. Any mechanism that makes Emacs try to auto-upgrade itself is also a no-no (in my view, I don't know Stefan and Chong's opinion). > IIRC Lennart also distributes an unpatched Emacs. Yes, though I think he doesn't update it very often (I haven't checked recently and I could be wrong). > Ah, yes, the Emacs w32 people. Now I understand your stance better (and > maybe Eli's). I think it would be unfair and unreasonable to make you > responsible of doing the job related to those libraries, but I also > think that you are not obliged in any way to provide binaries of > anything. Responsibility and obligation are disjoint concepts. I don't mind the load, but I hate accepting (not personally, but as a project) the responsibility to do things, like compiling GnuTLS binaries and distributing them, that are utterly disconnected from Emacs development per se. The moment we do that, people will expect we also provide up-to-date binaries for image libs, libxml2, d-bus, you name it. =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Juanma