From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Rmail mbox-format branch Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 09:36:20 +0200 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <41406C46.6050505@pajato.com> <01c4969e$Blat.v2.2.2$d48c9a40@zahav.net.il> <20040909221947.GB11694@fencepost> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1094801825 32507 80.91.224.253 (10 Sep 2004 07:37:05 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 07:37:05 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Paul Michael Reilly , Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Sep 10 09:36:55 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1C5fxm-0007i7-00 for ; Fri, 10 Sep 2004 09:36:54 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C5g38-0000RX-KD for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 10 Sep 2004 03:42:26 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1C5g2z-0000RG-Vj for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Sep 2004 03:42:18 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1C5g2y-0000Qw-5a for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Sep 2004 03:42:17 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C5g2y-0000Qt-3B for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Sep 2004 03:42:16 -0400 Original-Received: from [212.88.64.25] (helo=mail-relay.sonofon.dk) by monty-python.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.34) id 1C5fxG-0003Uf-SY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Sep 2004 03:36:23 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail 75110 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2004 07:36:20 -0000 Original-Received: from unknown (HELO kfs-l.imdomain.dk.cua.dk) (213.83.150.2) by 0 with SMTP; 10 Sep 2004 07:36:20 -0000 Original-To: Miles Bader In-Reply-To: <20040909221947.GB11694@fencepost> (Miles Bader's message of "Thu, 9 Sep 2004 18:19:47 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.1006 (Gnus v5.10.6) Emacs/21.3.50 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 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 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:26946 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:26946 Miles Bader writes: > On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 09:56:16PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> OTOH, if we don't do this now, it will need to wait until a very >> distant next release. > > Will the next release (after 21.4) be distant? > > I was envisioning just moving the unicode branch to the trunk about 5 minutes > after 21.4 is released, and immediately going into testing for version 22. That was my understanding too. I don't really see why we cannot wait with rmail/mbox until 22.1. rmail has done fine with BABYL for MANY years -- can't it do one more? Considering that the new code is said to be mostly UNTESTED (contrary to Gnus 5.10 which was very well tested), merging it now will _definitely_ delay the release of 21.4. If we hope for a 21.4 release in 2004 (rather than 2104), we should probably NOT do that. Compare these two schedules (if testing rmail adds 2 months delay): Release: When 21.4 without rmail End 2004 22.1 with rmail Mid 2005 Release: When 21.4 with rmail Mar 2005 22.1 Nov 2005 (include holiday season) So 22.1 would be 21.4 with unicode, multi-tty, plus rmail/mbox. And I don't see why we shouldn't be able to release that in 2005 (which considering the time span between 21.1 and 21.4 isn't distant). BTW, what happened with the face-remapping for 21.4 ? -- Kim F. Storm http://www.cua.dk