[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: address@hidden: Re: Possible help with stable Emacs releases.]

From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: Re: address@hidden: Re: Possible help with stable Emacs releases.]
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 18:06:33 +0200

> Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 17:53:39 +0200
> From: =?iso-8859-1?b?Suly9G1l?= Marant <address@hidden>
> Cc: Miles Bader <address@hidden>, address@hidden,
>       address@hidden
> > Like everyone else, I'm grateful for the offer, but I think you know
> > that it takes more to pretest a version than just administrative help
> > we are offered.  If this is enough to be able to run 2 pretests in
> > parallel, I just don't know; thus ``I'm not sure'' above.
> Why would we necessarily have to go through this pretest phase the
> way it is currently done for major releases?

I don't understand the question; are you saying that bugfix releases
don't need to go through a pretest phase?  I wasn't aware something
like that was being proposed in these discussions.

> You look worried about being involved in such releases, but we
> are proposing to be delegated to perform such a job

Unless we will agree to release bugfix versions without pretesting
them, I don't think you will be able to perform that job on your own.
A pretest needs to be done on several platforms, for starters.  Also,
at least in the past, some of the changes checked in to the release
branch were non-trivial enough to warrant significant testing.

Changing all that would mean a serious surgery of the current
development procedures.  I'm not necessarily opposed to such changes,
but I'd say that a change in version numbering is dwarfed by the
seriousness of issues we need to discuss and agree before such a
surgery could take place.

reply via email to

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