[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: please put version timestamp inside .el files

From: Dan Jacobson
Subject: Re: please put version timestamp inside .el files
Date: 14 May 2001 12:35:56 +0800
User-agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/20.7

>>>>> "RMS" == Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:

Dan>     OK, I hope so, otherwise it would be sort of like "non-open source
Dan>     code"... at least as far as timestamps are concerned.

RMS> We don't support the open source movement anyway, so whether we are
RMS> "open source" is not a matter of particular concern.

No I was meaning that the situation was not even up to the level of
openness that perhaps some of the open-source guys would accept, not
to mention the free-source guys.

The bad thing I'm taking about is that the emacs developers would have
a clear, handy and certain view of each emacs lisp .el file's
modification time, whereas the emacs end user would have to go thru
hoops to get it, or hope that ls -l would be correct thru possible
repackaging by RPM providers, or 'grep somestring ChangeLog' would
pin it down.  Anyway, he would have to learn fancy ways to get that
info instead of using 'head file.el'

Where in the past has the GNU end user not had the same view of GNU
software as the GNU developer?  I mean it's just plain not healthy to
just give "copyright 2000" strings in the various emacs files and hope
one can keep track of what version one is using...

Anyway, I think that I can prevent a bad precedent from starting
here.  I'm not sure but it seems there should be a switch in the CVS
system that says "OK, we know it is ugly, but make the distribution
version of the file the same as the developer version".  Enabling it
would avoid the evil of creating two "classes" in the GNU community,
the superusers with easy access to the privileged info, and the plain
end user, who uses the "version for people not expected to be
comparing .el files".

Anyway, preventing this information "monopoly" precedent from starting
would only cost 0.01% increase in GNU software size, I'm guessing.

>>>>> "Peter" == Peter S Galbraith <GalbraithP@dfo-mpo.gc.ca> writes:

Peter> So the RCS version number where the development file resides on
Peter> my disk has version 1.63.  When I check it into auc-tex's CVS, it
Peter> becomes v5.9.

... well, at least the date is meaningful... mmm, mainly I want
whatever they saw at Emacs Towers the night they released something to
be what I see later on when I eventually use it...

>>>>> "Eli" == Eli Zaretskii <eliz@is.elta.co.il> writes:

Eli> Past experience shows that this makes all kinds of trouble for Emacs
Eli> maintenance.

Can't there be some kind of auto timestamp mode enabled... I mean
there's even been lots of *.el code written to create
timestamps... one would think it odd that those .el files containing
that code would somehow be not suitable for timestamping... or at
least not suitable for timestamping in the version given to the general public.

Sorry, with limited brain power, it is rare that I found this opportunity
to make a big deal about something.
http://www.geocities.com/jidanni Tel886-4-25854780 e-mail:restore .com.

reply via email to

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