From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: strange emacs 21.4 on ftp.gnu.org:/pub/gnu/emacs Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2005 17:02:11 +0100 Message-ID: References: <73766b120502070245671f77ee@mail.gmail.com> <87brawmmzp.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1107793187 7811 80.91.229.2 (7 Feb 2005 16:19:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 16:19:47 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Juan LEON Lahoz Garcia , "Kim F. Storm" , rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Feb 07 17:19:46 2005 Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1CyBbY-0001qz-2H for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 17:19:16 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1CyBph-00034p-Ic for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 11:33:53 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1CyBmk-0001MA-Bv for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 11:30:50 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1CyBmZ-0001JC-UF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 11:30:42 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1CyBmZ-0001C6-82 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 11:30:39 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CyBLA-00056o-7g for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 11:02:20 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lola.goethe.zz) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CyBHn-0004Ju-Df; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 10:58:51 -0500 Original-To: Stefan Monnier In-Reply-To: (David Kastrup's message of "Mon, 07 Feb 2005 16:37:34 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) 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: , 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 X-MailScanner-To: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:33019 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:33019 [Following up to myself] David Kastrup writes: > Answering the question is of secondary interest to answering the > question how to deal with it. Personally, I'd like renaming this > thing to 21.3a even though Kim has already stated he considers it > unlikely that this might be a good idea/possible after the fact has > been established. [...] > Given that, I recommend that we bother about what lies within our > power, namely editing Emacs, as releasing it is not under our control. > I propose that we now, where another renaming of everything has > seemingly become necessary, decide to call the next major release > 22.0, and also fix all corresponding documentation and :version > strings (which are now completely fouled up) to refer to 22.0 instead. > > This will prevent > a) us having to change all version strings again for the next major > release more than once, > b) us and third part package providers from looking like utter idiots > when talking about release numbers, in case another security fix > intervenes, invalidating all previously made statements and assurances > again. To underline that we would want to avoid having to do such a step again, try a google search for "Emacs-21.4 -X-Emacs-21.4". That are about 8430 pages/articles talking about Emacs-21.4. It is a safe bet that at this point of time, pretty much none of them is talking about what has been released as 21.4 by now. Anybody volunteering for writing to the maintainers of those web pages and articles? I am still not convinced that the 21.3a idea would not be less painful in the long run, even though at the moment there exist signed, though unannounced, 21.4 Emacs packages. But again: it's not our call to make. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum