[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [rmail-mbox-branch]: expunge

From: Paul Michael Reilly
Subject: Re: [rmail-mbox-branch]: expunge
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 08:03:49 -0400
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.6 (X11/20040519)

Kim F. Storm wrote:
"Alfred M. Szmidt" <address@hidden> writes:

  > [I wouldn't recommened merging this back into trunk by a long
  >  shot, it is far to broken]

  It seems that the new rmail-mbox-branch code is quite far from
  'production quality' so IMHO it is not ready for inclusion in 21.4.

I'm kinda curious if anyone actually used the rmail-mbox-branch
before...  I was hoping that it would only contain minor bugs, but it
contains some quite serious bugs (eating my mail is serious, not even
being able to run it is serious since it means that it hasn't been
even tested!).

  Do we really need to postpone the release of 21.4 just for this one
  feature?  Can't it wait until 22.1 ?

To me as a user of rmail, I would really prefer it to wait for 22.1.
Right now it is far to broken, if there were more people that could
actualy help out and test it and send patches, then just maybe.  Even
if I said that one shouldn't merge that branch into trunk, maybe that
would be one good way to force people who use rmail to actually use it
and fix it right now and get it ready for 21.4; but I don't know what
the current status of the tree is right now.

And anyway, the babyl format has been used for such a long time that
postponing this feature until 22.1, 23.1 or even 100.1 won't do any
harm anyway.

Those are just my opionions as a user of rmail and emacs; feel free to
ignore them completely.

I think your opinion (based on actual experience with using the code)
is very important (to me at least :-) as it clearly expresses the
concern I have had (and expressed) for some time regarding the mbox

Unless we are 99.9% confident that the new mbox-rmail works as good
the the current babyl-rmail, releasing 21.4 with a broken/deficient
mbox-rmail would be a disaster!

Your findings indicates to me that we are far from those 99.9% ...

And as you say, babyl has done the job fine for MANY years, so what's
wrong using it a little longer (1-2 years isn't long in emacs
development :-)

As the author of much of the mbox code, I have long felt that the code should be tested in the trunk starting immediately after a release.
Yes, there is no rush for this code.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]