[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Emacs 29.3 released
From: |
Michael Albinus |
Subject: |
Re: Emacs 29.3 released |
Date: |
Wed, 27 Mar 2024 09:27:40 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) |
Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
Hi Eli,
>> It would be possible. I could change the Tramp version in the release
>> branch to the next anticipated release number. So I could change it now
>> to "2.6.3.29.4". However, I see at least two problems:
>>
>> - The Tramp version doesn't guarantee any longer uniqueness. Tramp
>> 2.6.3.29.4 would differ today and tomorrow. That was the reason to use
>> such an ambiguous version like 2.6.3-pre.
>>
>> - We might run into problems on ELPA. A user sees a builtin version of
>> Tramp 2.6.3.29.4, but in order to fix something for her there is also
>> Tramp 2.6.2.9 (let's say). I fear we'll have a hard time to explain,
>> that 2.6.2.9 is newer than 2.6.3.29.4.
>
> Then perhaps make-tarball.txt needs to say that the version of Tramp
> should be changed from X.Y.Z-pre to X.Y.Z as part of preparing the
> release? Or even do this automatically in admin/admin.el, as part of
> set-version?
No. Release X.Y.Z would attribute the full release of Tramp, not only
the part which is integrated into Emacs.
>> Perhaps it must not be coordinated with "me" only. A single
>> announcement, that there will be an emergency release within two days
>> would have helped. Usually, I scan Emacs related messages every single day.
>>
>> If I am unavailable that time, so be it. Not worse than now.
>
> Preparation of a release tarball is a precarious job: since we don't
> lock the Git repository while the release is being worked on, it must
> be done very quickly; any commits someone does during the time it
> takes to do all the steps necessary for producing the tarball is a
> setback that requires to go back several steps and start anew. So any
> additional dependency is a disadvantage I'd like to avoid.
You could start the prepare the release tarball after the grace period.
>> (FWIW, I don't understand yet why 29.3 was such an emergency that it was
>> released w/o any warning in advance.)
>
> Because it makes no sense to announce in advance that Emacs has
> security vulnerabilities. It's akin to waving the proverbial red flag
> at a bull.
I haven't proposed that such an announcement shall happen. I have only
proposed to send an alert like "Heads up! The next Emacs release will
happen on Sunday!".
Btw, I've got already the first rant that "Tramp 2.6.3-pre" is useless
for determining, whether a given patch is contained in Emacs 29.3. Right
they are!
<https://github.com/magit/magit/issues/3624#issuecomment-2022167445>
Best regards, Michael.
- Re: Emacs 29.3 released, (continued)
- Re: Emacs 29.3 released, Michael Albinus, 2024/03/24
- Re: Emacs 29.3 released, Eli Zaretskii, 2024/03/24
- Re: Emacs 29.3 released, Michael Albinus, 2024/03/26
- Re: Emacs 29.3 released, Eli Zaretskii, 2024/03/26
- Re: Emacs 29.3 released, Michael Albinus, 2024/03/26
- Re: Emacs 29.3 released, Ihor Radchenko, 2024/03/26
- Re: Emacs 29.3 released, Michael Albinus, 2024/03/26
- Re: Emacs 29.3 released, Ihor Radchenko, 2024/03/26
- Re: Emacs 29.3 released, Michael Albinus, 2024/03/26
- Re: Emacs 29.3 released, Eli Zaretskii, 2024/03/26
- Re: Emacs 29.3 released,
Michael Albinus <=
- Re: Emacs 29.3 released, Eli Zaretskii, 2024/03/27
- Re: Emacs 29.3 released, Michael Albinus, 2024/03/27
- Re: Emacs 29.3 released, Eli Zaretskii, 2024/03/27
- Re: Emacs 29.3 released, Michael Albinus, 2024/03/27
- Re: Emacs 29.3 released, Corwin Brust, 2024/03/27
Re: Emacs 29.3 released, Ulrich Mueller, 2024/03/26