From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Thien-Thi Nguyen Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: [d.love@dl.ac.uk: dynamic loading of native code modules] Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2002 13:19:23 -0700 Sender: guile-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <878z7rqfrg.fsf@raven.i.defaultvalue.org> <87znztllbx.fsf@raven.i.defaultvalue.org> <87znzsdcde.fsf@zagadka.ping.de> <87elgzn8j1.fsf@zagadka.ping.de> Reply-To: ttn@glug.org NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1020025476 6304 127.0.0.1 (28 Apr 2002 20:24:36 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2002 20:24:36 +0000 (UTC) Cc: rlb@defaultvalue.org, guile-devel@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 171vDn-0001dZ-00 for ; Sun, 28 Apr 2002 22:24:35 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 171vDN-0005ag-00; Sun, 28 Apr 2002 16:24:09 -0400 Original-Received: from ca-crlsbd-u5-c4a-a-172.crlsca.adelphia.net ([24.48.214.172] helo=giblet) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 171vCr-0005Yp-00 for ; Sun, 28 Apr 2002 16:23:38 -0400 Original-Received: from ttn by giblet with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 171v8l-0005UX-00; Sun, 28 Apr 2002 13:19:23 -0700 Original-To: mvo@zagadka.ping.de In-Reply-To: <87elgzn8j1.fsf@zagadka.ping.de> (message from Marius Vollmer on 28 Apr 2002 17:32:34 +0200) Errors-To: guile-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.9 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:549 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel:549 From: Marius Vollmer Date: 28 Apr 2002 17:32:34 +0200 I can explain the criteria for each bug specifically, but I wouldn't feel comfortable to do this generally. One fundamental criterium, however, is that the fix does not affect people who are not also affected by the bug. When the fix is also short and well localized, and the bug is relatively severe (i.e., making Guile fail to compile on a not-really-obscure platform), I'm tempted to make it release critical. ok, i'll write these down. But note that Rob is now the one to make the last call. I didn't really respect this previously, but I will in the future. its the release manager's call to make, so recording some criteria to help make that call easier to make is a good long-term investment. thanks for your thoughts. thi _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel