On March 2, 2007 at 9:14AM +0100, dak (at gnu.org) wrote: > >> > BTW, I feel Emacs 22.0.94 (pretest version of 22.1) reaches a > >> > quality for Debian release. So, please consider that Debian > >> > emacs22 package will be uploaded soon even though it is not yet an > >> > upstream official release at the moment. > >> > >> That is an excessively bad idea. Versions 22.0.x are _pretest_ > >> versions of Emacs 22, _not_ an official release. Releasing an emacs22 > >> package would be _thoroughly_ confusing as long as Emacs 22 is not > >> released.
The above my comment might confuse you, so I ask you in other words: Do you really think that uploading emacs22 Debian package at the moment, testing it in Debian experimental/unstable/testing, and then including it in Debian stable release Lenny on 2008 or later, is "an excessively bad idea"? > > Hmm, how about emacs22_22.1~pretest22.0.94-1_*.deb to clarify the > > upstream pretest version? > > I don't know about Debian version numbers, so somebody else will need > to comment. 22.1~pretest22.0.94 is lower than 22.1 and mentions 22.0.94 is a pretest version of 22.1. I suggest it instead of just 22.0.94 to prevent the confusing you said. > >> What is wrong with the current emacs-snapshot* packages? > > > > The emacs-snapshot package is not for Lenny (Etch+1, will be > > released 2008-2009?), but the emacs22 package is for Lenny. The > > emacs22 flavor has not yet been tested in Debian. We'll try to fix > > bugs that the packages fails with the emacs22 package for Lenny. > > Emacs 22 will be released in 2007 certainly. The level of > release-centred infighting on the Emacs developer list can't rise much > anymore, and the main holdback is that RMS is still getting all > possible copyright assignment questions cleared up. I think the holdback is not a critical problem for distribution, because gnu.org is still distributing Emacs 22.0.x. -- Tatsuya Kinoshita
pgp0vtqjHmFoT.pgp
Description: PGP signature
