[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [O] org-bbdb-anniversaries, bbdb v3

From: Nick Dokos
Subject: Re: [O] org-bbdb-anniversaries, bbdb v3
Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2016 11:35:27 -0500
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux)

Michael Welle <address@hidden> writes:

> Hello,
> Nick Dokos <address@hidden> writes:
>> Michael Welle <address@hidden> writes:
>>>>> I use Org 8.3.4 from the repository. There is no o-b-a-f in it, just the
>>>>> regular org-bbdb-anniversaries.
>>>> That's strange: I just updated to 8.3.4 and o-b-a-f is present.
>>> indeed:
>>> ~/.emacs.d/elpa/org-plus-contrib-20160307> grep -ri
>>> org-bbdb-anniversaries-future *
>>> ~/.emacs.d/elpa/org-plus-contrib-20160307> 
>>> Is that a function in org-bbdb.el?
>> Yes:
>> ,----
>> | org-bbdb-anniversaries-future is an autoloaded compiled Lisp function
>> | in ‘../org-mode/lisp/org-bbdb.el’.
>> | 
>> | (org-bbdb-anniversaries-future &optional N)
>> | 
>> | Return list of anniversaries for today and the next n-1 days (default n=7).
>> `----
>> I don't use ELPA so I may be completely wrong, but I thought ELPA
>> packages the maint branch, not the master branch. I think o-b-a-f
>> only exists in master, so it will appear in org-9.x
> ah, that was my question in my other post. I found your change set in
> master, but wasn't unsure on which branch the packages are based.
> Now I have to make my mind up, if I just wait or if I pull the master
> branch ;). 

I don't think o-b-a-f by itself is sufficient reason to upgrade :-)

I'm not going to say anything new or profound here, but it's worth

- if you depend on current org for "production" (with deadlines and
  deliverables that cannot be compromised), then you should probably
  leave your work machine alone. If you want to test, you should probably
  install master on a different machine (if you don't have a different
  physical machine, a VM will do fine) and test carefully before
  upgrading your work machine.

- if you can afford some breakage in your workflows and can either debug
  the failures or provide detailed information (backtraces, profiles
  etc) about them, I think the devs would appreciate that, but any
  testing you can do is probably worthwhile.

- That said, I think master is very stable, but there are backward
  incompatibilities in various places (check ORG-NEWS for details
  and the mailing list for breakage reports to see if they would affect
  you). The sooner you start getting ready, the smoother the transition
  will be.


reply via email to

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