From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bastien Subject: Re: org-export raises stringp nil error Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2013 07:40:57 +0100 Message-ID: <87vc928kcm.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> References: <87ip539io1.fsf@nautilus.nautilus> <87zjye96ph.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: In-Reply-To: (Glenn Morris's message of "Thu, 07 Mar 2013 20:36:33 -0500") List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Glenn Morris Cc: Lele Gaifax , emacs-orgmode@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org List-Id: emacs-orgmode.gnu.org Glenn Morris writes: >> I assumed it was okay to fix bugs after the last pretest, is it so? > > No, it is not ok, and I don't know why you would think it is. I missed the distinction between "pretest" and "release candidate". > The reason for this policy is (obviously) to prevent inadvertently > introducing mistakes. This seems to be exactly what has bitten us in > this case, where your patch just reverts the change from > > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-diffs/2013-02/msg00058.html > > Was that fixing a regression? I doubt it. I find it hard to draw a clear line between regressions and bugs, especially since Org 7.9.x versions are way behind the current Org master branch. > Please apply the first patch as soon as possible. Done. > The second includes stuff like deleting comments, declaring functions, > and changing autoload for "org-autoload". No, you may not apply this. > > If there were any fixes in there for important regression bugs against > Emacs 24.2, please make a separate patch with just those items. Those are not critical regressions, so I won't apply them. -- Bastien