From xemacs-m  Mon Apr  7 18:27:05 1997
Received: from mailhost.lanl.gov (mailhost.lanl.gov [128.165.3.12])
	by xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id SAA15604
	for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Mon, 7 Apr 1997 18:27:04 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from branagh.ta52.lanl.gov (branagh.ta52.lanl.gov [128.165.144.9]) by mailhost.lanl.gov (8.8.5/8.8.3) with SMTP id RAA12243 for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Mon, 7 Apr 1997 17:27:06 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by branagh.ta52.lanl.gov (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id RAA24976; Mon, 7 Apr 1997 17:21:55 -0600
Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 17:21:55 -0600
Message-Id: <199704072321.RAA24976@branagh.ta52.lanl.gov>
From: "John A. Turner" <turner@lanl.gov>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: xemacs-beta@xemacs.org
Subject: Re: xemacs "flavours" of packages
In-Reply-To: <rvvi5yxw4m.fsf@sdnp5.ucsd.edu>
References: <rvvi5yxw4m.fsf@sdnp5.ucsd.edu>
X-Mailer: VM 6.22 under 19.15 XEmacs Lucid

David Moore writes:

 > What is our policy with making XEmacs specific changes to packages?  For 
 > example, if we added defcustom's to efs (and no efs maintainer was on
 > the list) is there a mechanism in place to get that information back to
 > the maintainer?  If said maintainer has disappeared off the face of the
 > earth, how should we change the version number?  Clearly, we should
 > change the version number, but how?  And is a change in version number
 > being enforced?
 > 
 > Especially things such as supporting custom.el seem like obvious changes
 > to get propagated back to maintainers, as that it's available in GNU
 > Emacs and XEmacs (at least in the future and tiny backward-compat
 > modules exist).

Timely question, considering the post in c.e.x. by Michael Lamoureux
about frame-icon and diffs between his version and the one included in
19.15 (which I believe came from Bob Weiner).

I guess we (or I) should have contacted him before inclusion.  Oh
well.

It's a difficult issue, to be sure...

-- 
John Turner
http://www.lanl.gov/home/turner

