Re: Unicode 9.0

[David De La Harpe Golden]

On 12/03/16 15:53, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > From: Paul Eggert <address@hidden>
> > Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2016 14:01:12 -0800
> >
> > John Wiegley wrote:
> > > If you feel safe doing so, I'd be fine with it.
> >
> > +1.  The beta 9.0.0 files are more likely to be useful for Emacs 25.1 users than
> > the 8.0.0 files.
>
> Done.

This may well be something that was going without saying, but just in 
case / to be pernickety, there's a specific warning on the beta 9 page:

http://unicode.org/versions/beta-9.0.0.html
"""
No products or implementations should be released based on the beta UCD 
data files—use only the final, approved Version 9.0.0 data files, 
expected in June 2016.
"""

It is also stated there they have already frozen the code point and 
character names, and to be honest I haven't even looked at what's new in 
9 in any depth. In practice there may well not be any more changes 
before finalisation of 9, whether emacs-significant changes or otherwise.

And I'm _not_ objecting to the recent update (a761fbf2) of the files to 
beta 9 in git for a shakedown during pretest, which I think was what Eli 
meant anyway, but that's still distinct from an emacs official versioned 
release tarball.

I just mean (and this very probably won't even arise in the end): at 
some future time close to the emacs release, if for some reason unicode 
9 still isn't officially final yet, and if for some reason you don't 
want to delay the emacs release a bit to wait for it... the official 
emacs release should probably be made with older final definitions, not 
any beta ones.