Re: Heads-up: Emacs 26.1 RC1

[Eric Abrahamsen <eric@ericabrahamsen.net>]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> From: pierre.techoueyres@free.fr (Pierre Téchoueyres)
>> Cc: johnw@gnu.org,  emacs-devel@gnu.org
>> Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 20:59:26 +0100
>> 
>> >> If at least the patch provided by Eric in the message
>> >> 87y3m2jl3b.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net could be included would solve some
>> >> part of the problem.
>> >
>> > I cannot easily spot that message; could you please provide the URL in
>> > the form https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=29220#135, that
>> > uses the bug tracker?
>> >
>> 
>> Yes sorry I will do it next time.  You have found the right message :
>> https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=29220#135
>
> I'm okay with that if Eric agrees.

Yes! My apologies again for the slowness. I really wanted to get a grasp
on CEDET and how it uses eieio-persist, to avoid causing more problems,
but realistically I'm not going to get there anytime soon. Also, the
fact that Pierre's tests fail exactly the same way with Emacs 25 and
Emacs 26+fix indicate that CEDET has other issues that need resolving
first.

What I would like to do is merge the fix/eieio-persistent branch. That
has new tests from Pierre (Pierre, have you signed FSF papers?), more
tests from me, and better error reporting for the restore process. The
commits that actually "do something" are bf4f34ac7 and 1ea9947ca3189.

Is that okay? If so, what's the proper merge strategy to use?

Thanks,
Eric