Re: Future package: proposed content
"Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen(a)xemacs.org> writes:
This will surely cause hard-to-explain bugs in older installations
as
the xemacs-base version diverges from the old core version. (I think
in this case the syntax error will be easy to interpret, but suppose
later changes involve an incorrect result, not a syntax error?)
The point of the "back-to-the-future" package is to ensure warnings or
errors when the packaged version is unavailable.
Do we need a separate package for this or could we stick these things
into xemacs-base which has versions too? If I'm not mistaken
xemacs-base would depend on the b-t-t-f package, wouldn't it? This
implies, sort of, that the user would have to download three packages
in order to get the whole thing rolling.
But my mind might not grasp the full picture of it.
norbert.