From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Unicode Lisp reader escapes
Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2006 18:39:49 -0400
Message-ID: <E1FmIJ3-00046N-0J@fencepost.gnu.org>
References: <17491.34779.959316.484740@parhasard.net>	<E1Fe5dw-0005vd-00@etlken>
	<E1FeP3C-0002Jp-JW@fencepost.gnu.org>	<E1FeQAp-0003mu-00@etlken>
	<E1Fem6n-0002Qv-9c@fencepost.gnu.org>	<87iroarr9i.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org>	<E1Ff0vj-0000rd-4Y@fencepost.gnu.org>	<87d5egrb4c.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org>	<E1FfQ1R-0002A2-VQ@fencepost.gnu.org>	<87ves8p0us.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org>
	<87ves8ngtb.fsf@gmx.de>	<E1Ffjof-0000VF-EO@fencepost.gnu.org>
	<87u07qcnaa.fsf@gmx.de>	<m3wtcmw775.fsf@kfs-l.imdomain.dk>
	<87y7x289lr.fsf@gmx.de>	<E1FgCyb-0001Uq-Pk@fencepost.gnu.org>
	<E1FgX1D-0003ax-00@etlken>	<E1FhcG5-0002nB-VN@fencepost.gnu.org>
	<E1FhzIq-0001vc-00@etlken>	<E1FiC4w-00075E-2u@fencepost.gnu.org>
	<E1FiLLQ-0003MG-00@etlken> <87d5e5gwbi.fsf@jurta.org>
	<E1Fiix4-0006Tz-RZ@fencepost.gnu.org> <E1Fm3TQ-0006Iu-00@etlken>
Reply-To: rms@gnu.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1149288080 8523 80.91.229.2 (2 Jun 2006 22:41:20 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 22:41:20 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: juri@jurta.org, storm@cua.dk, emacs-devel@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca,
	alkibiades@gmx.de
Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jun 03 00:41:17 2006
Return-path: <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org
Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165])
	by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1FmIKP-0002WC-6h
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2006 00:41:13 +0200
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1FmIKO-0005nh-Ox
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2006 18:41:12 -0400
Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1FmIJ7-0005Gq-ME
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2006 18:39:53 -0400
Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1FmIJ7-0005GO-1A
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2006 18:39:53 -0400
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FmIJ6-0005GI-PE
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2006 18:39:52 -0400
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1FmIPf-0005mp-La
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2006 18:46:39 -0400
Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.34)
	id 1FmIJ3-00046N-0J; Fri, 02 Jun 2006 18:39:49 -0400
Original-To: Kenichi Handa <handa@m17n.org>
In-reply-to: <E1Fm3TQ-0006Iu-00@etlken> (message from Kenichi Handa on Fri, 02
	Jun 2006 15:49:32 +0900)
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:55642
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/55642>

    In which NEWS section, that information should go?

I think it belongs in

    * Editing Changes in Emacs 22.1


    It seems that this change is "Editing Changes", but I'm not
    sure we can declare it incompatible or not.  Perviously, if
    a file has "coding: latin-1!", it is treated as an invalid
    coding specification.  In that sense, this change is
    incompatible, but...

Giving a meaning to something that formerly was invalid
is not incompatible.