oh, good point.
How about we create a viewmail-dev list that anyone can subscribe to? That address both issues. Mark Göran Uddeborg <[email protected]> writes: > I'm adding the new "maintainers" list, but for now keep the "info" > list too as non-maintainer users might want to chime in here. > > Mark Diekhans wrote: > > John Stoffel <[email protected]> writes: > > > I suspect we should just got with debian 11 as our base, along with > > > Ubuntu 20.04 LTS, if it's still accepting updates. If not... let's > > > push to whatever the lowest emacs version is currently shipped on > > > current stuff. > > > > > > Unless someone else has a better idea? > > > > sounds very reasonable, I have no better idea. > > I would question if we need to go back even that far. Isn't it good > enough to support the current version of emacs, i.e. 29 right now, for > any new versions of VM. > > I live mostly in the Fedora world, but I understand both Debian 11 and > Ubuntu 20.04 are old. Would the packager for those distributions > really update VM? Without emacs itself being updated? That is not how I > package for Fedora; the latest and/or upcoming release gets the latest > VM, older stay where they are unless something actually breaks. > > If someone is using a distribution with an older emacs, then it would > make sense you use an older version of VM too. (At least as far as new > developments are concerned. If we would find e.g. a security issue in > VM, that would be another thing.) > > Would this be too agressive? My goal is to keep the load on developers > as light as possible, in order to maximize the chance things get done. > > [GNUPG:] NEWSIG [email protected] > [GNUPG:] ERRSIG A3BDBAE07D4757EB 1 8 01 1720906661 9 > 25758E3A5ED7B931DE4A5030A3BDBAE07D4757EB > [GNUPG:] NO_PUBKEY A3BDBAE07D4757EB > [GNUPG:] FAILURE gpg-exit 33554433
