Re: Win32 GnuTLS DLL installer?

[Ted Zlatanov]

On Thu, 21 Sep 2017 19:58:21 +0300 Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> wrote: 

>> From: Ted Zlatanov <address@hidden>
>> Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2017 11:38:01 -0400
>> 
EZ> How do you define "outdated"?  GnuTLS developers maintain 3 branches
EZ> in parallel, and release versions from all the 3 branches.  Which one
EZ> should we follow, and does any N+1 release from that branch mean that
EZ> the N release is considered "outdated" and should be replaced?
>> 
>> That's usually the platform's responsibility, but in this case it seems
>> up to us. I would keep up with the current branch (whatever was
>> installed already) at least, on the principle of least surprise.

EZ> So whenever the current branch sees a new release, someone would have
EZ> to port it to Windows and provide the binaries?

I'd check for the binaries that are actually available, so it wouldn't
do anything other than saying "hey there's a new DLL you should run."
And there would be no new process on the build side.

EZ> Moreover, accommodating a new version of GnuTLS might mean changes to
EZ> Emacs C and/or Lisp sources -- are we going to release patches to
EZ> the core sources through ELPA or something?
>> 
>> Theoretically the current branch will not require that.

EZ> Theoretically, yes.  In practice, this can and did happen.

You're right. I don't see a way around that except tracking version
compatibility in a security-patches package or repo OR accepting that
rare problem as a known and acceptable situation.

>> I would just post a non-intrusive message to the user for now.

EZ> Not sure how a message could help with source-level changes.  People
EZ> who track the Git repository normally don't keep local patches.
EZ> People who use official releases don't even have the sources in most
EZ> cases.

Right. I'd just check the DLL binaries actually available.

A message would help the user determine that they should upgrade.

Ted