From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Please pretest Emacs 21.3 Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 08:19:27 +0300 (IDT) Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1022736217 10822 127.0.0.1 (30 May 2002 05:23:37 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 05:23:37 +0000 (UTC) Cc: "D. Goel" , emacs-devel@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 17DIPR-0002oR-00 for ; Thu, 30 May 2002 07:23:37 +0200 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 17DIi4-0001ZF-00 for ; Thu, 30 May 2002 07:42:53 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 17DIQ4-0004Xy-00; Thu, 30 May 2002 01:24:16 -0400 Original-Received: from is.elta.co.il ([199.203.121.2]) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 17DINC-0004T7-00; Thu, 30 May 2002 01:21:18 -0400 Original-Received: from is (is [199.203.121.2]) by is.elta.co.il (8.9.3/8.8.8) with SMTP id IAA11598; Thu, 30 May 2002 08:19:28 +0300 (IDT) X-Sender: eliz@is Original-To: Miles Bader In-Reply-To: Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.9 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:4505 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:4505 On 30 May 2002, Miles Bader wrote: > "D. Goel" writes: > > BTW, the new README in emacs/ now mentions version 21.2... this need > > not worry me right? > > It shouldn't worry you; I see the same thing. I think the script which > is used to make the actual distribution automatically ensures that the > correct version is used. I should have checked in the files that have the version stated in them, but it seems like I've forgotten. Sorry.