Max Nikulin <maniku...@gmail.com> writes: > On 02/04/2023 23:44, Ihor Radchenko wrote: >> 1. The old problem with mixed installation that manifests itself for >> some users >> 2. The new problem with org-assert-version, which appears to be even >> more frequent, despite trying preventing (1). > > I leave decision up to you. My opinion that both cases are weird. With > `org-assert-version' users become aware that Org is broken rather > quickly, without it they have a time bomb that gives impression of bugs > in Org. From my point of view the real issue is that in both cases error > messages are not instructive. The downside of current implementation of > `org-assert-version' is that Org does not work at all.
I guess we might try to run a poll. My view on this bug is rather skewed as I saw it too many times. The true number of Org users affected may actually vary. > Ihor will you consider the issue as reproduced if I compile emacs from > some tag in git repository on Debian or Ubuntu, not with provided binary > packages? Sure. Anything Emacs devs can act on. If you can prove that the problem is in Emacs source code, we can report it in https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=59882 and let Emacs devs fix things. Currently, it looks like Debian modifies certain aspects of Emacs loading. In such scenario, we cannot expect things to be fixed on Emacs side. > Do you consider the following as similar to package install issue for > Emacs < 29? See the attachment This looks like https://orgmode.org/list/jwvsfkv5s7l.fsf-monnier+em...@gnu.org But Emacs >26 + package-install specifically arranges unloading the older version of the library. It should not suffer from this (in theory). -- Ihor Radchenko // yantar92, Org mode contributor, Learn more about Org mode at <https://orgmode.org/>. Support Org development at <https://liberapay.com/org-mode>, or support my work at <https://liberapay.com/yantar92>
