Re: emacs-snapshot or emacs$NUM-snapshot?
Hilko Bengen <bengen@debian.org> writes:
> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
>
>> Hilko Bengen <bengen@debian.org> writes:
>>
>>> And could we please call it emacs23-snapshot?
>>
>> Why? It is a current packaging of the trunk. What feature set
>> constitutes "Emacs 23" is an evolving matter. There is no distinctive
>> difference between "emacs22-snapshot" and "emacs23-snapshot".
>
> The feature set that makes up Emacs 22 is pretty much fixed, isn't it?
Sure. Nowadays. Which is why emacs22-snapshot makes no sense.
> Even if the feature set for Emacs 23 hasn't been set in stone (and I'd
> expect it to stay that way for a while), I think that a set of
> -snapshot packages that track development towards Emacs 23 would be
> useful for developers and Debian maintainers who work on Elisp
> packages.
Sure. But emacs23-snapshot suggests some compatibility with Emacs23.
That is not the case. Nothing compiled for one snapshot is guaranteed
to work with the next snapshot.
> Not to mention users of Debian's unstable distribution (who will get
> to keep both pieces if anything breaks). The -snapshot packages
> probably shouldn't become a part of stable releases.
>
> I see two reasons for calling the packages emacs23-snapshot* as
> opposed to emacs-snapshot:
>
> a) There'd be a sane upgrade path once Emacs 23 is released.
Not more or less sane than with emacs-snapshot.
> b) Elisp packages can specify for which package they should be
> byte-compiled. A package that has worked fine with a pre-Emacs22
> snapshot package might fail once a post-Emacs22 snapshot package if
> we keep the name `emacs-snapshot'.
A compiled package that has worked fine with one version of any snapshot
can fail with any next snapshot.
In fact, this happens fairly regularly in Emacs' integrated Lisp
packages, every few months or so. When this happens, one needs to do
"make bootstrap" instead of the usual "make recompile" to get a working
Emacs again.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
Reply to: