From xemacs-m  Thu Apr  3 12:56:58 1997
Received: from steadfast.teradyne.com (steadfast.teradyne.com [131.101.1.200])
	by xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id MAA25731
	for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Thu, 3 Apr 1997 12:56:57 -0600 (CST)
Received: from kiki.icd.teradyne.com (kiki.icd.teradyne.com [131.101.1.30]) by steadfast.teradyne.com (8.7.1/8.7.1) with ESMTP id OAA26509 for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Thu, 3 Apr 1997 14:00:32 -0500 (EST)
Received: from spacely.icd.teradyne.com (spacely.icd.teradyne.com [131.101.10.9]) by kiki.icd.teradyne.com (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id NAA18922 for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Thu, 3 Apr 1997 13:53:42 -0500 (EST)
Received: from spacely by spacely.icd.teradyne.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id NAA19013; Thu, 3 Apr 1997 13:57:10 -0500
Message-Id: <199704031857.NAA19013@spacely.icd.teradyne.com>
X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0gamma 1/27/96
To: xemacs-beta@xemacs.org (XEmacs Beta List)
Subject: Re: 19.15 future 
In-reply-to: dmoore's message of 03 Apr 1997 10:35:17 -0800.
	     <rv4tdorm3e.fsf@sdnp5.ucsd.edu> 
reply-to: acs@acm.org
X-Attribution: Vin
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Thu, 03 Apr 1997 13:57:09 -0500
From: Vinnie Shelton  <shelton@icd.teradyne.com>


>>>>> On 03 Apr 1997 10:35:17 -0800, David Moore <dmoore@ucsd.edu> said:

David> Vinnie Shelton  <shelton@icd.teradyne.com> writes:

>> > Since there are many of us and few of Steve, someone could take
>> > up the mantle of keeping a source tree with all the blessed 19.15
>> > patches applied and push out a tarball every couple of weeks.
>> > The people using binary distributions lose, but such is life.

>> If the consensus is that this is A Good Thing, I think I can manage to
>> do this.  It's probably a good way to vet the patches themselves.

David> This sounds good.  But we need to make sure that the ``version'' says
David> something about the patchlevel, or else handling bug/crash reports will
David> just get out of control.


Hmmm.  This is a good point - one I should have thought of before.
The same complaint can be made about the patches themselves, of
course.  My plan had been for the bi-weekly patched source tarball to be
*exactly* the sum of applying the patches on the page to a virgin
19.15 dist.  Perhaps I should just include a version#-du-jour
(semaine?) patch.

More thoughts/suggestions?

vin


