From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:555a:: with SMTP id
 o26mr13813722qtr.190.1589760827545;
        Sun, 17 May 2020 17:13:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6830:1593:: with SMTP id
 i19mr3486171otr.182.1589760826959;
 Sun, 17 May 2020 17:13:46 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!weretis.net!feeder7.news.weretis.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!209.85.160.216.MISMATCH!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: Sun, 17 May 2020 17:13:46 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <874kse5xi8.fsf@ok8aw.iso>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=76.77.182.20;
 posting-account=W2gdXQoAAADxIuhBWhPFjUps3wUp4RhQ
NNTP-Posting-Host: 76.77.182.20
References: <7bd06951-89ec-4a4e-a1e0-bcd38c223497@googlegroups.com>
 <874kse5xi8.fsf@ok8aw.iso>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <4f975ca3-050b-4bc0-b996-14c10158ee7f@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Gnu Emacs Ada mode 7.1.1 released.
From: Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org>
Injection-Date: Mon, 18 May 2020 00:13:47 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:58723
Date: 2020-05-17T17:13:46-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Sunday, May 17, 2020 at 9:36:49 AM UTC-7, Anders Wirzenius wrote:
> Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org> writes:
> 
> > Gnu Emacs Ada mode 7.1.1 is now available in GNU ELPA.
> >
> > Relative to the previous Ada mode release (7.0.1), this is a
> > minor feature release.
> >
> 
> In my elpa repository
> 
> ~/.emacs.d/elpa/ada-mode-7.1.1/ada-mode.el contains:
> 
> line 9:     ;; Version: 7.1.1
> ...
> line 120:   (let ((version-string "7.1.0"))
> 
> Is there a typo in line 120?

yes, argh.