Re: "Official" binary of Emacs-24.4 for MS-Windows

[Dani Moncayo <dmoncayo@gmail.com>]

> I don't object to not compressing the files, if compressing them
> causes trouble on some systems.

This system is Windows 8.1 64-bit, and, according to what you said:

>> I don't see a reason not to compress files.  Emacs can display and use
>> them just fine, even if gzip.exe is not installed/available, right?

not being able to show the manual (nor visiting .gz files -- I've just
tried) seemed like a bug.  It this expected (when gzip.exe is not
available) or should I report this as a bug?

Regarding the format of the binary archive, there are several options:

  Format  Archive Size
  zip     50 MB
  tar.gz  50 MB
  tar.xz  32 MB
  7z      31 MB

As you see, the last two formats produce an archive considerably
smaller.  Which format should I choose?

Regarding the name of the binary archive, the convention so far has
been "emacs-VERSION-bin-i386".  But if I eval `system-configuration'
from that Emacs I get `i686-pc-mingw32'.  So, perhaps we should name
the archive as "emacs-24.4-bin-i686", or (even better IMO),
"emacs-24.4-bin(i686-pc-mingw32)".  I like the latter format, because
it is a general and compact way of telling not only the hardware
architecture, but also OS flavor it was built for.  It is quite
self-explanatory.

But of course the choice is yours. Which filename should I choose?

And finally, note that I haven't got an answer yet to the request I
sent 2 days ago (to ftp-upload@gnu.org) for ftp upload rights.  So I
still can't upload anything.  (I could send the archive to anyone with
proper upload right...)

-- Dani Moncayo