Ben Pfaff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Are you sure that the changes are really so extensive? Emacs 20
> comes with Gnus 5.7, whereas the `gnus' package has Gnus 5.8.8.
> A version change of .1.8 does not sound particularly major to me.
You may not understand Gnus version numbering. Odd number
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> "Ben" == Ben Pfaff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ben> Alan Shutko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Ben Pfaff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > 2b. w3-el-e20 would be the same old w3, not from > CVS. This would
>> undoubtedly irritate people > wh
Alan Shutko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Ben Pfaff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > 2b. w3-el-e20 would be the same old w3, not from
> > CVS. This would undoubtedly irritate people
> > who wanted newer versions of w3.
>
> I'd suggest thi
Ben Pfaff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 2b. w3-el-e20 would be the same old w3, not from
> CVS. This would undoubtedly irritate people
> who wanted newer versions of w3.
I'd suggest this. Gnus has far more changes between the old Gnus and
* Colin Walters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2001-10-26 14:14]:
> On the other hand, maybe policy changes should be filed as bugs
> against emacsen-common?
Thanks for your suggestion, it is done for the present case. See
Bug#117359.
--
Rafael
Ben Pfaff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> As the maintainer of Debian's w3 packages, I'm currently
> contemplating packaging w3 for Emacs 21, so that we'd have
> w3-el-e20 and w3-el-e21 packages. But there are several options.
> The viable choices I've come up with so far are as follows:
[...]
>
As the maintainer of Debian's w3 packages, I'm currently
contemplating packaging w3 for Emacs 21, so that we'd have
w3-el-e20 and w3-el-e21 packages. But there are several options.
The viable choices I've come up with so far are as follows:
1. Add minimal patches to Debian's existing w3 i
7 matches
Mail list logo
