4:49 a.m.
Congratulations, Mike! Amazing that a major commit to gnus doesn't
break anything!
The XEmacs Package Smoketest writes:
These are the results from the XEmacs Package Smoketest:
21.5-tip-mule -- ok
21.5-tip-nomule-- ok
21.4-nomule -- ok
21.5-nomule -- ok
21.4-mule -- ok
21.5-mule -- ok
Updated packages in the package tree for this build was:
- gnus
For details check "http://www.contactor.se/~matsl/smoketest"
--
This is generated by the XEmacs Package Smoketest.
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Buildreports mailing list
XEmacs-Buildreports(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-buildreports
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
4:07 a.m.
Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Congratulations, Mike! Amazing that a major commit to gnus
doesn't
break anything!
Thanks!
This is the warm-up to MH-E 8, which will likely require changes to
other packages. (Maybe not for the package build to complete, but
almost certainly for some of these packages to interoperate correctly.
MH-E has a very limited public API, so other packages tend to use
internal interfaces, and a lot of that changed going from MH-E 7 to MH-E
8.)
By the way, I noticed that I forgot to list a couple changes in the
ChangeLog (e.g., the new README.readmes file). I'm assuming I can let
that slide, but if it'd be better for me to fix up the ChangeLog, let me
know.
mike
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
6:54 a.m.
New subject: Tramp 2.2. (was: [Success] The Package Smoketest)
Mike Kupfer <mike.kupfer(a)xemacs.org> writes:
Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> Congratulations, Mike! Amazing that a major commit to gnus doesn't
> break anything!
Thanks!
This is the warm-up to MH-E 8, which will likely require changes to
other packages.
While we are at it: What about upgrading to Tramp 2.2? IIRC, XEmacs has
still packaged Tramp 2.0.something, which is 5 years old.
mike
Best regards, Michael.
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
5:55 p.m.
New subject: Tramp 2.2. (was: [Success] The Package Smoketest)
Michael Albinus writes:
While we are at it: What about upgrading to Tramp 2.2? IIRC, XEmacs
has
still packaged Tramp 2.0.something, which is 5 years old.
Be my guest! The problem was GPLv3 and the fact that XEmacs wasn't.
If you need help, or you're suggesting that we do it :-), I'm "away
from my desk" until July 6, but will answer mail on this topic.
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
6:53 p.m.
New subject: Tramp 2.2.
"Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen(a)xemacs.org> writes:
Be my guest! The problem was GPLv3 and the fact that XEmacs
wasn't.
I know. I'm happy this is solved meanwhile.
If you need help, or you're suggesting that we do it :-), I'm
"away
from my desk" until July 6, but will answer mail on this topic.
I'll try myself. I've archived a message from last automn, how to
reenable an account for XEmacs. Will contact Mike.
Best regards, Michael.
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
9:11 p.m.
New subject: Tramp 2.2.
Michael Albinus writes:
"Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen(a)xemacs.org> writes:
> Be my guest! The problem was GPLv3 and the fact that XEmacs wasn't.
I know. I'm happy this is solved meanwhile.
> If you need help, or you're suggesting that we do it :-), I'm "away
> from my desk" until July 6, but will answer mail on this topic.
I'll try myself. I've archived a message from last automn, how to
reenable an account for XEmacs. Will contact Mike.
Wonderful! Thank you very much!
Steve
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
9:10 a.m.
New subject: Packages, GLPv3 and 21.4 (was: Tramp 2.2.)
>>>> Stephen J Turnbull <stephen(a)xemacs.org> writes:
The problem was GPLv3 and the fact that XEmacs wasn't.
What is the current view on upgrading or adding packages that might or
might not work under 21.4. Some time has passed since 21.5 core got
GPLv3 or later so it might be the time to address this again. The
dilemma is:
- (My understanding is) GPLv3 or later packages can't really be
modified to work with 21.4 if that is the sole purpose of the
change.
- We would like to take advantage of using GPLv3 packages in the
package tree to stay in sync etc, etc. (lots of reasons.)
- We would like to use the ability to sync the 21.5 XEmacs core with
parts of GNU Emacs to get GPLV3 or later features possibly needed
by GPLv3 or later packages.
My, probably naive, view is to branch the packages so that we can move
forward with adding GPLv3 or later stuff, and still have a branch that
21.4 could use.
My, probably very, very naive, view is to just at some time state that
the packages with that release is not practical to use with 21.4 and
that 21.4 users should not upgrade or they should move to 21.5.
Views?
Yours
--
%% Mats
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
9:15 a.m.
New subject: Packages, GLPv3 and 21.4
Mats Lidell <matsl(a)xemacs.org> writes:
My, probably naive, view is to branch the packages so that we can
move
forward with adding GPLv3 or later stuff, and still have a branch that
21.4 could use.
My, probably very, very naive, view is to just at some time state that
the packages with that release is not practical to use with 21.4 and
that 21.4 users should not upgrade or they should move to 21.5.
I think we should just move ahead unbranched: We don't have the
manpower, I think, to maintain branches of packages. If and when people
report problems with 21.4., we can think about fixing them.
--
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
5:02 p.m.
New subject: Packages, GLPv3 and 21.4 (was: Tramp 2.2.)
Mats Lidell writes:
What is the current view on upgrading or adding packages that might
or
might not work under 21.4. Some time has passed since 21.5 core got
GPLv3 or later so it might be the time to address this again. The
dilemma is:
- (My understanding is) GPLv3 or later packages can't really be
modified to work with 21.4 if that is the sole purpose of the
change.
If the change only works with 21.4, so you've got
(if (emacs-version>= 21 5)
(code-for-21.5)
(code-for-21.4))
I would say technically speaking you can't do that. In practice, I
wouldn't worry about it, because if necessary we can probably move the
"shim" code into 21.4 as an implementation of the 21.5 API. If that
doesn't work, the feature probably doesn't work in 21.4 at all, right?
- We would like to take advantage of using GPLv3 packages in the
package tree to stay in sync etc, etc. (lots of reasons.)
- We would like to use the ability to sync the 21.5 XEmacs core with
parts of GNU Emacs to get GPLV3 or later features possibly needed
by GPLv3 or later packages.
We have those already, now that 21.5 is GPLv3.
My, probably naive, view is to branch the packages so that we can
move
forward with adding GPLv3 or later stuff, and still have a branch that
21.4 could use.
Too much pain in the long run. IMO, it will be less pain to just
release 21.6 based on 21.5, and make that usable for current 21.4 users.
I would say that we should just do what comes naturally and revisit
this question if and when push comes to shove (ie, there's real apin
for 21.4 users due to an upgrade in a package -- and IMO that includes
"we really want this new feature or bug fix even though the old
version was reasonably usable" as well as breaking the thing
completely).
Steve
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
7:25 p.m.
New subject: Packages, GLPv3 and 21.4
"Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen(a)xemacs.org> writes:
I would say that we should just do what comes naturally and revisit
this question if and when push comes to shove (ie, there's real apin
for 21.4 users due to an upgrade in a package -- and IMO that includes
"we really want this new feature or bug fix even though the old
version was reasonably usable" as well as breaking the thing
completely).
For Tramp 2.2, I try to keep compatibility with 21.4. New features (like
remote processes) will work with 21.5 only, if ever.
Steve
Best regards, Michael.
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
9:57 p.m.
Mike Kupfer writes:
By the way, I noticed that I forgot to list a couple changes in the
ChangeLog (e.g., the new README.readmes file). I'm assuming I can let
that slide, but if it'd be better for me to fix up the ChangeLog, let me
know.
I'll leave that up to you. One possibility would be to fix the
ChangeLog now, commit it locally and push it later.
Steve
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
4565
days inactive
4571
days old
10 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
Michael Albinus -
Michael Sperber -
Mike Kupfer -
Stephen J. Turnbull -
The XEmacs Package Smoketest