From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "John Wiegley" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Contributors and maintainers Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 09:53:14 -0700 Organization: New Artisans LLC Message-ID: References: <83y4exe71v.fsf@gnu.org> <87zizcfzna.fsf@T420.taylan> <20151021.102719.485566340.wl@gnu.org> <871tcoehk2.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87eggofmy2.fsf@T420.taylan> <874mhkz3w5.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1445492216 5673 80.91.229.3 (22 Oct 2015 05:36:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 05:36:56 +0000 (UTC) Cc: David Kastrup , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: taylanbayirli@gmail.com (Taylan Ulrich =?utf-8?Q?=22Bay=C4=B1rl=C4=B1?= =?utf-8?Q?=2FKammer=22?=) Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Oct 22 07:36:42 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Zp8YI-0007Gw-Oj for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 07:36:38 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56385 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zp8YI-0002pf-Ax for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 01:36:38 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:52073) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zowds-0001N8-I0 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 12:53:37 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zowdr-0003Sn-PH for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 12:53:36 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-pa0-x22a.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400e:c03::22a]:36631) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zowdk-0003RC-PH; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 12:53:28 -0400 Original-Received: by pacfv9 with SMTP id fv9so62128187pac.3; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 09:53:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:date:organization:message-id :references:user-agent:mail-followup-to:mime-version:content-type; bh=4FMBKuFY2wyjFXhI51Bd80wDu+jlj3CRyPfn8S2BfHQ=; b=O1GJxdjpMW/1raD6vHEZG3thQ84HxM5jlOygtPC+0Qqs9q8ZwA6FQU/hPHoaRrErR3 RMz3KDxG6Xiq0d8eKRMOIz3aIqMh3OwVb/nFxhPu0yMHVtY6WFWvBjZY7TUdXh478Tr6 wvC11Hs/Nqf+157f6RE0ZWr+f2DH5J3tAejOKiFRyYlgROQ/EmnsH3EFqK7WnMzlXOhe SZiOZcwYL2V9+Cdz40JQNuWbd2tpYROfaFeOiDyJoRf0yL3sHIWVqrFDFAYN6NkoWOgZ 2/xS2e9550k6jovZkmhc5pW+NFdpCF7/S+G5mSXO5h1YwsXTP+nnbTYsFe73J3df1hj4 WblQ== X-Received: by 10.67.22.34 with SMTP id hp2mr11727032pad.92.1445446408009; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 09:53:28 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from Vulcan.local (76-234-68-79.lightspeed.frokca.sbcglobal.net. [76.234.68.79]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u10sm10050657pbs.63.2015.10.21.09.53.27 (version=TLS1 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 21 Oct 2015 09:53:27 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by Vulcan.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id 938E2F5B31EE; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 09:53:26 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <874mhkz3w5.fsf@gnu.org> (Tassilo Horn's message of "Wed, 21 Oct 2015 16:34:50 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (darwin) Mail-Followup-To: taylanbayirli@gmail.com (Taylan Ulrich =?utf-8?Q?=22Bay?= =?utf-8?Q?=C4=B1rl=C4=B1=2FKammer=22?=), David Kastrup , emacs-devel@gnu.org X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:400e:c03::22a 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:192346 Archived-At: >>>>> Tassilo Horn writes: > But wouldn't it be better to contribute a set of ERT tests for > `shell-quote-argument' in order to increase the trust we can have in it and > possibly find and fix problems it might actually have? I've asked for this several times. I'm still waiting on a response, even if it's just, "I don't want to." Which is odd given that one of the central complaints is that the submitter feels ignored. I'll ask again: Taylan, would you be willing to provide us with tests to demonstrate the flaws in `shell-quote-argument'? John