From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17110 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2005 17:00:48 -0000 Received: from news.dotsrc.org (HELO a.mx.sunsite.dk) (130.225.247.88) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 24 Jan 2005 17:00:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 76693 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2005 17:00:39 -0000 Received: from sunsite.dk (130.225.247.90) by a.mx.sunsite.dk with SMTP; 24 Jan 2005 17:00:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 4192 invoked by alias); 24 Jan 2005 17:00:34 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 20741 Received: (qmail 4179 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2005 17:00:33 -0000 Received: from news.dotsrc.org (HELO a.mx.sunsite.dk) (130.225.247.88) by sunsite.dk with SMTP; 24 Jan 2005 17:00:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 76412 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2005 17:00:33 -0000 Received: from mailhost1.csr.com (HELO MAILSWEEPER01.csr.com) (81.105.217.43) by a.mx.sunsite.dk with SMTP; 24 Jan 2005 17:00:25 -0000 Received: from exchange03.csr.com (unverified [10.100.137.60]) by MAILSWEEPER01.csr.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.3.12) with ESMTP id for ; Mon, 24 Jan 2005 16:59:02 +0000 Received: from csr.com ([10.102.144.127]) by exchange03.csr.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Mon, 24 Jan 2005 17:03:09 +0000 To: zsh-workers@sunsite.dk, pws@csr.com Subject: Re: Is this a bug for zsh 4.2.3? In-Reply-To: Message from Bart Schaefer of "Mon, 24 Jan 2005 16:51:15 GMT." <1050124165115.ZM31124@candle.brasslantern.com> References: <16883.11714.845975.423895@cns-build4.cisco.com> <1050123064401.ZM16256@candle.brasslantern.com> <200501241052.j0OAqY3S007966@news01.csr.com> <1050124165115.ZM31124@candle.brasslantern.com> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 17:00:24 +0000 Message-ID: <5129.1106586024@csr.com> From: Peter Stephenson X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 Jan 2005 17:03:09.0704 (UTC) FILETIME=[94C03080:01C50236] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 on a.mx.sunsite.dk X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=6.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Hits: -2.3 Bart Schaefer wrote: > Hrm. I don't have much either, I'm in the midst of an unpleasant chest > cold. What's involved nowadays? If, for example, I set up a patches > branch in CVS, can you make tarfiles to put wherever? (Or are we now > trying to avoid having a patches branch?) I would think so... > Though it would be nice to get the Cygwin patches for the configure > scripts (mentioned by someone last week) in there as well. I haven't seen what's involved (it seems to compile so I don't know what the problem is). > Meanwhile, what's the scheme nowadays for version numbering the dev > versions in CVS? It's presently 4.2.3-dev-1, but it seems like it > should be either 4.3.0-dev-1 or 4.2.4-dev-1. We keep the individual sets of digits in a logical order, so 4.2.3-dev-1 is after 4.2.3. This makes automated version testing work (is_at_least, for example). Test versions break this but they're supposed to be short lived (using 4.2.3-test-A would work and I think I've done something like that in the past). The other fix is to sacrifice a version number that will never be released. -- Peter Stephenson Software Engineer CSR PLC, Churchill House, Cambridge Business Park, Cowley Road Cambridge, CB4 0WZ, UK Tel: +44 (0)1223 692070 ********************************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. www.mimesweeper.com **********************************************************************