Getting no messages

Getting no messages

[Dirk Herrmann]

Hi folks,

for some reason I don't receive any mail from the guile lists any more.
Could someone please check what the problem is?  Thanks a lot.

Best regards, 
Dirk



_______________________________________________
Guile-devel mailing list
Guile-devel@gnu.org
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel

Re: Getting no messages

[Rob Browning]

Dirk Herrmann <dirk@sallust.ida.ing.tu-bs.de> writes:

> for some reason I don't receive any mail from the guile lists any more.
> Could someone please check what the problem is?  Thanks a lot.

Hmm, I got this one, but hadn't gotten any for a while before that, so
maybe everyone's actually just that quiet right now.

(...tooooo quiet...)

In other news 1.6.1 should be ready soon -- Marius has backported the
guile-ltdl stuff and updated us against the new upstream 1.4.3
ltdl.  I've got to get Michael's emacs patch in there and check a
couple of other things.  After that we should be ready to go.

-- 
Rob Browning
rlb @defaultvalue.org, @linuxdevel.com, and @debian.org
Previously @cs.utexas.edu
GPG=1C58 8B2C FB5E 3F64 EA5C  64AE 78FE E5FE F0CB A0AD


_______________________________________________
Guile-devel mailing list
Guile-devel@gnu.org
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel

Re: Getting no messages

[Dirk Herrmann]

On Fri, 25 Oct 2002, Rob Browning wrote:

> Dirk Herrmann <dirk@sallust.ida.ing.tu-bs.de> writes:
> 
> > for some reason I don't receive any mail from the guile lists any more.
> > Could someone please check what the problem is?  Thanks a lot.
> 
> Hmm, I got this one, but hadn't gotten any for a while before that, so
> maybe everyone's actually just that quiet right now.

Thanks for your reply.  I have checked with the mailing list archives on
the guile wep pages and I am sure that I have not received some of the
recent mails.

> In other news 1.6.1 should be ready soon -- Marius has backported the
> guile-ltdl stuff and updated us against the new upstream 1.4.3
> ltdl.  I've got to get Michael's emacs patch in there and check a
> couple of other things.  After that we should be ready to go.

I had added two points to the 1.6.1 TODO - list.  However, I am not sure
that I have followed the process correctly.  And, it is not essential that
these points actually get fixed for 1.6.1., but I wanted them to be
remembered somewhere.

Best regards,
Dirk Herrmann



_______________________________________________
Guile-devel mailing list
Guile-devel@gnu.org
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel

Re: Getting no messages

[Neil Jerram]

>>>>> "Rob" == Rob Browning <rlb@defaultvalue.org> writes:

    Rob> In other news 1.6.1 should be ready soon -- Marius has backported the
    Rob> guile-ltdl stuff and updated us against the new upstream 1.4.3
    Rob> ltdl.  I've got to get Michael's emacs patch in there and check a
    Rob> couple of other things.  After that we should be ready to go.

"got to" - why?  Isn't it worth releasing 1.6.1 sooner with just the
fixes (especially ltdl) available so far?

        Neil



_______________________________________________
Guile-devel mailing list
Guile-devel@gnu.org
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel

Re: Getting no messages

[Neil Jerram]

>>>>> "Neil" == Neil Jerram <neil@ossau.uklinux.net> writes:

>>>>> "Rob" == Rob Browning <rlb@defaultvalue.org> writes:
    Rob> In other news 1.6.1 should be ready soon -- Marius has backported the
    Rob> guile-ltdl stuff and updated us against the new upstream 1.4.3
    Rob> ltdl.  I've got to get Michael's emacs patch in there and check a
    Rob> couple of other things.  After that we should be ready to go.

    Neil> "got to" - why?  Isn't it worth releasing 1.6.1 sooner with
    Neil> just the fixes (especially ltdl) available so far?

Further thought: for new features like Mikael's emacs interface,
shouldn't we rather put those only into head CVS (i.e. 1.7.x)?

Personally I find parallel-branch development (which I do for
applicable doc fixes and enhancements) to be an additional burden that
I would prefer not to have.  I think it's easier all round if we
restrict 1.6.x to bug fixes (broadly speaking), only put new stuff
into 1.7.x, and look forward to 1.8 sooner rather than later.

        Neil



_______________________________________________
Guile-devel mailing list
Guile-devel@gnu.org
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel

Re: Getting no messages

[Marius Vollmer]

Neil Jerram <neil@ossau.uklinux.net> writes:

> Further thought: for new features like Mikael's emacs interface,
> shouldn't we rather put those only into head CVS (i.e. 1.7.x)?

It's only a bugfix.  The emacs interface used to work, but it didn't
in 1.6.0.

> Personally I find parallel-branch development (which I do for
> applicable doc fixes and enhancements) to be an additional burden that
> I would prefer not to have.  I think it's easier all round if we
> restrict 1.6.x to bug fixes (broadly speaking), only put new stuff
> into 1.7.x, and look forward to 1.8 sooner rather than later.

Yes, definitely.

-- 
GPG: D5D4E405 - 2F9B BCCC 8527 692A 04E3  331E FAF8 226A D5D4 E405


_______________________________________________
Guile-devel mailing list
Guile-devel@gnu.org
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel

Re: Getting no messages

[Neil Jerram]

>>>>> "Marius" == Marius Vollmer <mvo@zagadka.ping.de> writes:

    Marius> Neil Jerram <neil@ossau.uklinux.net> writes:
    >> Further thought: for new features like Mikael's emacs interface,
    >> shouldn't we rather put those only into head CVS (i.e. 1.7.x)?

    Marius> It's only a bugfix.  The emacs interface used to work, but it didn't
    Marius> in 1.6.0.

Well I didn't think the necessary elisp code was in 1.4, but I haven't
checked.

        Neil



_______________________________________________
Guile-devel mailing list
Guile-devel@gnu.org
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel

Re: Getting no messages

[Rob Browning]

Neil Jerram <neil@ossau.uklinux.net> writes:

> Personally I find parallel-branch development (which I do for
> applicable doc fixes and enhancements) to be an additional burden that
> I would prefer not to have.  I think it's easier all round if we
> restrict 1.6.x to bug fixes (broadly speaking), only put new stuff
> into 1.7.x, and look forward to 1.8 sooner rather than later.

I totally agree about getting 1.8 out ASAP, but I consider these fixes
bug-fixes:

  - srfi headers were ommitted in 1.6.0.

  - emacs stuff was broken.

  - ltdl was broken.

I'd be perfectly happy if the only 1.6.X releases after 1.6.1 are doc
updates, and debian/* commits.  I may even leave the debian/* out and
save that for 1.8...

-- 
Rob Browning
rlb @defaultvalue.org, @linuxdevel.com, and @debian.org
Previously @cs.utexas.edu
GPG=1C58 8B2C FB5E 3F64 EA5C  64AE 78FE E5FE F0CB A0AD


_______________________________________________
Guile-devel mailing list
Guile-devel@gnu.org
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel

Re: Getting no messages

[Rob Browning]

Neil Jerram <neil@ossau.uklinux.net> writes:

> "got to" - why?  Isn't it worth releasing 1.6.1 sooner with just the
> fixes (especially ltdl) available so far?

Because it was a trivial effort that I could easily do while fixing up
the versioning, NEWS, README, etc. for the release, because I told
Mikael I would, and because I talked with Marius about it on IRC
yesterday and he thought we should...

In any case, it's been done.

-- 
Rob Browning
rlb @defaultvalue.org, @linuxdevel.com, and @debian.org
Previously @cs.utexas.edu
GPG=1C58 8B2C FB5E 3F64 EA5C  64AE 78FE E5FE F0CB A0AD


_______________________________________________
Guile-devel mailing list
Guile-devel@gnu.org
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel

Re: Getting no messages

[rm]

On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 07:30:23PM +0200, Dirk Herrmann wrote:
> Hi folks,
> 
> for some reason I don't receive any mail from the guile lists any more.
> Could someone please check what the problem is?  Thanks a lot.

The list server is running a Python program -- you probably didn't
indent your mail correctly ;-)

I only got a handfull of mails from the mailing list during the
last few days and suspect that something went wrong. Could this be
caused by the recent outage of mail.gnu.org?

 Ralf Mattes

> Best regards, 
> Dirk
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Guile-devel mailing list
> Guile-devel@gnu.org
> http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel


_______________________________________________
Guile-devel mailing list
Guile-devel@gnu.org
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel