Re: page break failure

[Alexander Kobel]

Hugh Myers wrote:
> Thanks for the tip on
> 2.odd versus 2.stable as well. Hadn't realized that a policy of
> collateral damage was allowed.

It isn't allowed, AFAICS, but can you prognose if you do collateral 
damage every time you write a patch?
The testing is not as thorough as for stable releases. You noticed 
yourself that you /need/ the unstable version, since it has extra 
features not available with the older version. Which, in return, means 
that those features might not yet integrate seamlessly with all existing 
stuff.

In your case, the new TabStaff kinda seems to break vertical spacing / 
page layout. Which is bad, and probably also a regression against 2.12., 
but it's a inevitable risk when implementing new features. However, it 
does not seem to break anything "globally", just what is incident to 
TabStaff.
I'm not surprised, though, if even everything using the old TabStaff 
features works as expected, since probably some regression test case 
would have shown the converse, and the patches had not been applied as 
they are.

> Given your approach to testing (and
> your experience) this should work as well as more conservative
> approaches. [...]

Note, by the way, that I can't write you an "official" version - I'm not 
a developer, I just read the mailing lists every now and then.


Cheers,
Alexander