From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Neil Jerram Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: merge from 1.8 branch Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 19:49:22 +0100 Message-ID: <87bqo0teml.fsf@ossau.uklinux.net> References: <87odslqb5e.fsf@zip.com.au> <87mz84rmpx.fsf@ossau.uklinux.net> <87slhupqwc.fsf@zip.com.au> <87bqo6zpct.fsf@ossau.uklinux.net> <87wt6sp7dw.fsf@raven.defaultvalue.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1161802235 12743 80.91.229.2 (25 Oct 2006 18:50:35 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 18:50:35 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Oct 25 20:50:32 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GcnpV-0000Eo-JQ for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 25 Oct 2006 20:50:21 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GcnpU-00023n-NH for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 25 Oct 2006 14:50:20 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GcnpS-00022z-Hl for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Oct 2006 14:50:18 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GcnpQ-0001zT-62 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Oct 2006 14:50:17 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GcnpP-0001zI-RF for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Oct 2006 14:50:15 -0400 Original-Received: from [80.84.72.33] (helo=mail3.uklinux.net) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1GcnpP-0002L1-Qf for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Oct 2006 14:50:16 -0400 Original-Received: from laruns (host86-145-51-69.range86-145.btcentralplus.com [86.145.51.69]) by mail3.uklinux.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E56D040A94C; Wed, 25 Oct 2006 18:50:14 +0000 (UTC) Original-Received: from laruns (laruns [127.0.0.1]) by laruns (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB9B66F773; Wed, 25 Oct 2006 19:49:22 +0100 (BST) Original-To: Rob Browning In-Reply-To: <87wt6sp7dw.fsf@raven.defaultvalue.org> (Rob Browning's message of "Sun, 22 Oct 2006 10:50:19 -0700") User-Agent: Gnus/5.1007 (Gnus v5.10.7) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:6182 Archived-At: Rob Browning writes: > Neil Jerram writes: > >> I guess I could copy all my debugging and Emacs interface stuff into >> 1.8.x; it's all only documentation and Scheme code, after all, so >> couldn't hurt much. Any votes for or objections to this? > > If the changes are extremely unlikely break existing code that's based > on 1.8, then I probably wouldn't object. > > I suppose the hard restriction we have is that we can't change > existing APIs (C or Scheme) in backward incompatible ways during the > stable series. Yes, I think those are good guidelines. (And according to those, I believe I can proceed.) > Of course we could also just shift 1.8 into maintenance mode, start > focusing on the main branch, and plan to release 1.10 sooner. I'd be > open to that as well. How would that be different from the current situation? (In other words, in what sense is 1.8 not already in maintenance mode?) Regards, Neil _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel