Re: Nightly CVS tarballs

SY> Do you mean, a diff against the previous day? Easily doable, SY> but is it necessary? Yes, and no. Just convenient for someone who doesn't have a nearly bleeding edge copy. Either new to the bleeding edge or haven't hacked it since the last beta. Second, it's useful documentation to see where recent activity is. I use CVS that way all the time, it's more accurate than anybody's ChangeLogs except Ben's. SY> I don't know about other developers, but if I didn't have SY> access to CVS for whatever reason I'd be keeping a working SY> backup. Working, yes, bleeding edge, no. Not everybody has the luxury of waiting 'til tomorrow; for many developers, "tomorrow" will be _Monday_. SY> People who hack from a nightly CVS tarball have to realise SY> that the code they have could be up to 24 hours out of date SY> and need to make allowances for that. Such as, if the current SY> day is broken, wait until the next day's tarball is SY> released. (Of course, they are quite welcome to fix the SY> breakage.) SY> Is that too harsh? No. But if the point is to make it convenient for people who don't have normal (== CVS) access to hack bleeding edge XEmacsen, why not take out some nearly free insurance? It costs us almost nothing to make the two diffs I propose. Two or four lines of code, 100kB (if Ben or Martin is in top form) of disk space. If that means that once in the next year somebody who otherwise would not be able to work on XEmacs _now_ can work on XEmacs _now_, I think it's worth it. But you're doing the work. :-) It also means that if somebody reports a compile bug against "today", we can reply "did you try yesterday?" if the cause isn't obvious instead of digging around in the code for a bug that very well may not be there. -- University of Tsukuba Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences Tel/fax: +81 (298) 53-5091 _________________ _________________ _________________ _________________ What are those straight lines for? "XEmacs rules."