Bastien <b...@gnu.org> writes: >> The code I quoted explicitly removes the "-dev" part. Would you prefer >> to keep it? > > Yes, let's keep it, otherwise (org-release) reads like a lie. > > Why is it necessary to emit org-version.el? > > We could have (defun org-version ...) and (defun org-git-version ...) > from within org.el, right?
org-version is already defined in org.el (using org-git-version and org-release) org-git-version requires running git. org-release could be defined in org.el > Also, I don't think we need org-release: the info org-version provides > is enough to know if you are loading Org from a stable (ELPA) release > or from a local git repository. > > WDYT? They are not the same. org-git-version uses tags + HEAD. org-release uses lisp/org.el (after the patch). Also, they are used by Makefile to generate orgcard.tex We need to be careful in this area. This Makefile + Elisp usage is what makes me uncomfortable changing things in this area. >> See the attached. > > Tested and works fine, modulo the -dev part that we should keep. Note that in Org mode version 9.6 (release_9.5.5-830-g77f9e1 @ [load-path]) release_9.5.5 while version is 9.6 I feel like you missed this detail. -- Ihor Radchenko, 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
