From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/33953 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE (Kai =?iso-8859-1?q?Gro=DFjohann?=) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Releases Date: 30 Dec 2000 20:59:54 +0100 Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035169967 27838 80.91.224.250 (21 Oct 2002 03:12:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 03:12:47 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: Original-Received: from spinoza.math.uh.edu (spinoza.math.uh.edu [129.7.128.18]) by mailhost.sclp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2692D04A0 for ; Sat, 30 Dec 2000 16:08:41 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu (lists@Sina.HPC.UH.EDU [129.7.3.5]) by spinoza.math.uh.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAB13008; Sat, 30 Dec 2000 14:01:53 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Sat, 30 Dec 2000 13:59:42 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from mailhost.sclp.com (postfix@66-209.196.61.interliant.com [209.196.61.66] (may be forged)) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA23421 for ; Sat, 30 Dec 2000 13:59:31 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from waldorf.cs.uni-dortmund.de (waldorf.cs.uni-dortmund.de [129.217.4.42]) by mailhost.sclp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACE1AD04A0 for ; Sat, 30 Dec 2000 14:59:56 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from marcy.cs.uni-dortmund.de (marcy.cs.uni-dortmund.de [129.217.20.159]) by waldorf.cs.uni-dortmund.de with ESMTP id UAA25845 for ; Sat, 30 Dec 2000 20:59:55 +0100 (MET) Original-Received: from lucy.cs.uni-dortmund.de (lucy [129.217.20.160]) by marcy.cs.uni-dortmund.de id UAA04577; Sat, 30 Dec 2000 20:59:55 +0100 (MET) Original-Received: (from grossjoh@localhost) by lucy.cs.uni-dortmund.de (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian 8.9.3-21) id UAA28843; Sat, 30 Dec 2000 20:59:55 +0100 Original-To: ding@gnus.org X-Face: 6=pZ4hVbjN:C?j1$h/-bi4:F%*~B#Rxb$[0%!{5NK"dE:_QRAM]Dzl=$yMu%Rh4xCSm/#>! $n%@SHJ](KFJKL,uF\=G=bRJQC$ ?+Dlxu*pj.Z,-GK<~y7sd/l*PN\]>} Original-Lines: 49 User-Agent: Gnus/5.090001 (Oort Gnus v0.01) Emacs/21.0.95 Precedence: list X-Majordomo: 1.94.jlt7 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:33953 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:33953 On 30 Dec 2000, Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen wrote: > What kind of release thing should we be doing these days? Should > there be a new Gnus 5.8? I could just check out the last 5.8 before > we went to o0-1 and release that, but, er, would that be a thing to > do? What do you think about releasing a 5.8.8 which is as similar as possible to 5.9? This way people without Emacs 21 can get the most recent `stable' Gnus. But you could leave in everything which was removed from 5.9, I guess. Hm. Maybe this would be an approach: Create a patch of the differences between 5.8.7 and 5.9 and delete from this patch everything which deletes features, such as the s/mime stuff and so on. Then, apply this patch to 5.8.7, giving 5.8.8. What do you think about this? Another thought is: right now, it seems that people haven't really added features to ognus like crazy. So maybe the current ognus looks more like a bugfix release of 5.8? So one idea would be to rechristen ognus as 5.8 and release that as 5.8.8. But that would mean a lot of fiddling with the release/branch structure. Hm. Yet another thought: go to the head of the 5.8 branch in CVS (I'm sure there is such a branch, isn't there?), and merge ognus changes in there. This would be kinda like the previous paragraph, only without the fiddling in the release/branch structure. Yet ANOTHER thought: release 5.8.7 again, only this time with mail-source-delete-incoming set to the right value :-) Are there serious bugs in 5.8.7? I vaguely remember that I have told people to fetch a 5.8.8 snapshot quite a number of times, but I don't remember the details. Gack. I wish I did. But there must have been a reason for me to do so. Hm. > And there was some talk about not doing any alpha releases any more, > but just keep that in cvs... Hm. That's an idea. Hm. I think it would be nice to keep the snapshots, though. Maybe there are people out there for whom CVS is a real hassle but who would still like access to the development sources. Maybe if you keep a week's worth of daily snapshots? kai -- ~/.signature