Re: emacs.app_9.0pre2-1_i386.changes REJECTED

[Adrian Robert]

On Dec 9, 2005, at 10:43 AM, Henrik Enberg wrote:

> > > Don't know whether I should put :-) or :-( here...
> >
> > I would rather like useful comments than shit like that.
>
> Here's a useful comment.  Are you going to release an experimental
> branch that's not considered stable enough to be in the Emacs trunk
> as a stable program?

Well, the notion of "stable" is relative.  We were looking by analogy  
to the "emacs-snapshot' Debian package -- it's not based on a release  
of GNU Emacs, but it's still a package.  Among unreleased code, the  
unicode-2 branch of emacs is considered less stable than CVS head, I  
suppose, but it's open to debate where the line for Debian should be  
drawn.  Based on my own daily use of unicode-2, it's at least as  
stable as Head was, say, a year or so ago (though maybe the Debian  
snapshot package started more recently than that?), but I'm not sure  
this is consistent with others' experience.  And I know some people  
have said that unicode-2 is a little slower than head..