Re: address@hidden: Re: Possible help with stable Emacs releases.]

[Stefan Monnier]

> The only problem I can see with that approach (though it might not
> matter to you upstream) is that it makes the eventual version number
> of the more substantial upstream development releases a moving target.

As I said, I have no interest in discussing revision numbers.
If you feel like naming them 2.1, then 876.23.56.88, and the next one Toby,
that's perfectly fine with me.  Others here will probably disagree, but in
any case I think most such discussions are wastes of time, because it's
really not nearly as important as it's made out to be.


        Stefan