From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Patches with independent changes Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2014 19:22:27 +0200 Message-ID: <83ob30asdo.fsf@gnu.org> References: <8361pbg5vy.fsf@gnu.org> <52E08D31.3080801@cs.ucla.edu> <8338kffj7m.fsf@gnu.org> <52E0A0ED.4020601@cs.ucla.edu> <83y526el6z.fsf@gnu.org> <52E18EC0.7090302@cs.ucla.edu> <83lhy5ests.fsf@gnu.org> <52E2277B.9000205@cs.ucla.edu> <83bnz1eo1x.fsf@gnu.org> <52E29827.7060209@cs.ucla.edu> <83ha8tcb4z.fsf@gnu.org> <52E2EA7B.2080501@cs.ucla.edu> <83fvoccyqt.fsf@gnu.org> <52E3EDE1.9050709@cs.ucla.edu> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1390670570 32205 80.91.229.3 (25 Jan 2014 17:22:50 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2014 17:22:50 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Paul Eggert Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jan 25 18:22:55 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1W76wX-0004Eu-VH for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 25 Jan 2014 18:22:54 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:52018 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W76wX-0001nc-Io for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 25 Jan 2014 12:22:53 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:52559) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W76wR-0001nU-5m for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Jan 2014 12:22:52 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W76wM-0005Ix-1M for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Jan 2014 12:22:47 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout24.012.net.il ([80.179.55.180]:33981) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W76wL-0005Gf-Pn for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Jan 2014 12:22:41 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.mtaout24.012.net.il by mtaout24.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0MZY00B00VZMA900@mtaout24.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Jan 2014 19:22:22 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by mtaout24.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0MZY003QKW9AGG80@mtaout24.012.net.il>; Sat, 25 Jan 2014 19:22:22 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: <52E3EDE1.9050709@cs.ucla.edu> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 80.179.55.180 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:169069 Archived-At: > Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2014 09:01:21 -0800 > From: Paul Eggert > CC: emacs-devel@gnu.org > > Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > There was no second change. > > Sure there was. It would have been easy to apply a simpler patch that > contained just the single change needed to fix the porting bug, namely > to call chmod rather than fchmod (attached). Instead, you applied a > more-complicated patch that contained multiple independent changes. No, I applied a _single_ change, which in effect simply restored the previous code, but only for WINDOWSNT. The new fchmod code had no influence on what I added, and wasn't touched. > Moving on to trunk bzr 116064: > > >> These independent changes weren't needed to fix the bug. > > > > Yes, they were needed > > Obviously they were not needed to fix the bug, as the bug would have > been fixed without them. They were "needed" only in the sense that it's > nicer for maintainers and users if Emacs is simpler and smaller. No, it's not "nicer", it's necessary, because otherwise the build would have failed when compiler warnings are turned on and used as errors. > > Your changes were different in kind > > I don't see why. I doubt that. > We all install patches containing multiple independent changes, only > some of which are needed to fix a bug. And that's OK. The > important thing is that changes in a patch should all be related, so > that it makes sense to install them together. Then any number of patches can be installed in a single commit, because they are all "related" -- after all, they are all about Emacs.