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: It is time for a feature freeze (it is NOW or never). Date: 08 Apr 2004 17:06:44 +0200 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <87eks0654s.fsf@sno.mundell.ukfsn.org> <87n06bp4ng.fsf@sno.mundell.ukfsn.org> <8765cwkejr.fsf@mail.jurta.org> <200404071157.UAA25094@etlken.m17n.org> <200404071312.WAA25268@etlken.m17n.org> <87zn9nqras.fsf@emacswiki.org> <200404080203.LAA26847@etlken.m17n.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1081437292 27810 80.91.224.253 (8 Apr 2004 15:14:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2004 15:14:52 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org, Kenichi Handa Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Thu Apr 08 17:14:43 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1BBbEp-0008I0-00 for ; Thu, 08 Apr 2004 17:14:43 +0200 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1BBbEp-0005x2-00 for ; Thu, 08 Apr 2004 17:14:43 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1BBbAy-0006wE-UX for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Thu, 08 Apr 2004 11:10:44 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.30) id 1BBb8B-0004i3-LJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Apr 2004 11:07:51 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.30) id 1BBb7D-0003zS-Ge for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Apr 2004 11:07:22 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1BBb76-0003wh-RD for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Apr 2004 11:06:44 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([127.0.0.1] helo=lola.goethe.zz) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1BBb6z-0006kc-W5; Thu, 08 Apr 2004 11:06:38 -0400 Original-To: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) In-Reply-To: Original-Lines: 86 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3.50 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:21374 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:21374 storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) writes: > Kenichi Handa writes: > > > In article , storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) writes: > > > I suggest that we make a complete feature freeze on HEAD for 21.4 NOW !!! > > > > I have thought that we are going to take the following > > schedule. > > > > (1) Release the current RC branch as 21.4. > > I have no opinion on this. I also don't know how important that is. I don't know the fixes as opposed to 21.3. But it _is_ important that we get the four years of development since 21.0 feature freeze out of the door sometimes. People increasingly switch to Emacs CVS since that is the only sane option to do, and that means that they have to use something with a stability completely based on timing and good luck. If we don't release from HEAD before potentially large merges, they will be screwed without an alternative. > > (2) Feature freeze on HEAD. > > Yes. > > > (3) Merge HEAD into RC branch, and make it 21.4.50. > > There is no need to merge to the existing RC branch. Right. > We just create a new RC branch from HEAD for 21.5 named > EMACS_21_5_RC. > > > (4) Merge Unicode branch into HEAD, and make it 22.0.0. > > Yes. Whatever. > I suggest we also merge the multi-tty branch to HEAD quickly. After 21_5_RC has been split off. If it turns out that post-release changes leave HEAD stable enough, we can still surprise the world by following up with 22.0 on short notice. But at the current point of time, the tester base for the branches is not so large that we should take the risk. > > (7) Feature freeze on HEAD (i.e. Unicode version) > > I suppose that bidi support is not mature enough for 22.1 -- > > actually IMO, bidi support would warrent another major number, > i.e. 23.1. Actually, I'd want to see both. Anyhow, after the unicode merge, the bidi branch will need to synch up, and one can then see how it fares. Unicode makes somewhat more sense with bidi (and I want to be able to offer Emacs at one time for creation of philological texts, and vocalized Hebrew is not exactly irrelevant in that respect). But if it is apparent that 22.0 would be help up by it considerably, I'd say to go without it. > Since there is some confusion as to what 21.4 is or would be, I > suggest we aim for using 21.5 as the version for the release from > the new RC branch. If things take too long, we still have the > option to release 21.4 from the old RC branch. Sounds reasonable. Also, if we happen to skip a number, people will notice that there is some larger change. > > I agree. But, I think bug-fixing work for 21.5 (or 21.4) > > must be done on RC branch so that (4) can be done promptly > > and we can have more users of Unicode version, which boosts > > the release of 22.1. > > Yes, lets branch now for 21.5 and fix bugs on the RC branch. Sounds reasonable. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum