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

pan pan pan

>>>>> "Milan" == Milan Zamazal <pdm at debian.org> writes:

Milan> The important thing is how much the released versions (whatever
Milan> the _release_ is) retain backward compatibility and whether they
Milan> are stable enough or the stable versions can be easily
Milan> identified.  If most versions in SCM satisfy this then it's OK.

Actually, the most important thing is for the package maintainer to make
sure that dependencies are updated together. It is not terribly
important if a new version of L is backwatds compatible as long as A, B
and C is updated along the way, or alternatively L is kept back until
the others have caught up.

Most packages probably does not need to keep absolutely up to the
bleeding edge anyway. 

I guess the most problematic package I know of is slime which moves
forward at a blinding pace but often breaks this and that in the
process, and often in corners that the maintainer is not aware
of. Perhaps we should lobby for some minimal test suite that would check
that at least all supported emacsen can start up on all supported

Christian Lynbech       | christian #\@ defun #\. dk
Hit the philistines three times over the head with the Elisp reference manual.
                                        - petonic at hal.com (Michael A. Petonic)

Reply to: