GNU bug report logs - #48404
28.0.50; "Invalid version syntax" errors with read-extended-command

Previous Next

Full log

Message #43 received at 48404 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 48404 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, stefan <at> marxist.se, tsdh <at> gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#48404: 28.0.50; "Invalid version syntax" errors with
 read-extended-command
Date: Sun, 16 May 2021 16:06:03 +0200

Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:

>> The idea is to have a softer transition when obsoleting commands -- `M-x
>> some-obsoleteTAB' will list the command if it's been "recently"
>> obsoleted, but also list the new command name (in parentheses).  This
>> will hopefully help people to learn the new command name.
>
> But this comes with a heavy price: commands from any package that is
> not bundled with Emacs will not be able to take advantage of this
> feature, ever.  Is it worth punishing those packages' users to have a
> softer transition?  Given our conservative approach to obsoleting
> stuff, I'm not sure.

I'm not quite sure I understand you here?  If the version can't be
parsed, then the command will still show up in `M-x TAB', which means
that the obsoletion of these commands is very soft indeed.

But I'm wondering whether `version-to-list' should be more lax here.
That is, currently it'll barf of things like:

(version-to-list "28.1 Magit/2.5")

It might make sense to allow the obsoletion versions to refer to both an
(approximate) Emacs version, as well as a package version.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.