Ihor, > >> 1. If compat.el happens to lack support of some function, we will need > >> to contribute to compat.el directly and synchronize Org releases with > >> compat.el releases. > > > > would a separate "org-compat.el" (in addition to compat.el) somehow > > solve this? (i worry about the synch'ing.) > > That's what we already do. > Using compat.el means that we can remove some of the functions from > org-compat.el and instead rely on compat.el where the same functions are > maintained more carefully.
i see, yes. i'm just thinking that, for a given release CUR (like i know anything about org-mode release procedures!) we would use whatever has been available in compat.el since release CUR-n (for whatever n we use -- 2?), and supplement that, in org-compat.el, with whatever other compatibility features *we* (org-mode) need to support releases [CUR-n .. CUR]. (and, presumably, contribute whatever might be appropriate from org-compat.el to compat.el, so we can prune it out from org-compat.el at some future point in time.) i'm *only* thinking of trying to de-couple org-mode development from that of compat.el, in the mindset that "less cross-dependencies" == "less complication". if that makes sense. cheers, Greg