From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Thierry Volpiatto Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: patch vs. overwrite in bzr Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2012 21:38:39 +0200 Message-ID: <87wr5v5lts.fsf@gmail.com> References: <87k42cwys8.fsf@gnu.org> <87limhuldm.fsf@gnu.org> <871uo7g4j6.fsf@gnu.org> <87iphjhbm8.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87398lgrat.fsf_-_@niu.edu> <871uo5c7r0.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87pqbpj5j3.fsf@altern.org> <87aa2szgig.fsf@gnu.org> <87ehs4yrhz.fsf@gnu.org> <87vclg804u.fsf@gmx.de> <87ehs3sxm1.fsf@gmail.com> <83iphfctk5.fsf@gnu.org> <871uo31iz2.fsf@gmail.com> <83bon7co4j.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1333568367 27167 80.91.229.3 (4 Apr 2012 19:39:27 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2012 19:39:27 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Apr 04 21:39:24 2012 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 1SFW39-0007o7-Bl for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2012 21:39:23 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35755 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SFW2k-0004DB-RW for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2012 15:38:58 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:58498) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SFW2d-0004CC-6C for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2012 15:38:56 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SFW2Z-00016p-Gy for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2012 15:38:49 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-we0-f169.google.com ([74.125.82.169]:60436) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SFW2Z-00016Z-7w; Wed, 04 Apr 2012 15:38:47 -0400 Original-Received: by werj55 with SMTP id j55so526029wer.0 for ; Wed, 04 Apr 2012 12:38:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-type; bh=dqSFiaEzCX35BAF32lf4g0uUVgEvSxPzDbokaDkXCUY=; b=fPCVXIIew6Tjfcla9gHxgPo4E8gEHC3xoy0ouQhmWTEeNzQscSmkpm/zVk/JbtG6c3 TPKGwrF9sL3DbRC6VB83YbZQ5Sm7u7VbfjwueFbayOTKwPhDQ56w6/vG428BksTtBdwc 8WS+4733ImB+Qn1+RiLpaYmE/X/JNWIwdnzHS4VE7OB7fMNG7ZZ9W4U36W7/v8xAESOn 211DRniVr7f8PoagQSZRxUa8arETmTRwWwyXwnBcjVltNu3WfblRq68y0CImAqkemqWt +u45Fk+FcKnAiHskQcCXSULmG868Djgf5wRnt53mtoiImIycW1JGSQZZhggilAOT0ZOx eSBQ== Original-Received: by 10.216.136.100 with SMTP id v78mr2163990wei.88.1333568323411; Wed, 04 Apr 2012 12:38:43 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from thierry-MM061 (lbe83-2-78-243-104-167.fbx.proxad.net. [78.243.104.167]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id bx13sm7222399wib.10.2012.04.04.12.38.40 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 04 Apr 2012 12:38:42 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <83bon7co4j.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Wed, 04 Apr 2012 22:07:08 +0300") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.95 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 74.125.82.169 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:149385 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> From: Thierry Volpiatto >> Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2012 19:53:53 +0200 >> >> You should not have to overview the dev branch, only the trunk and merge >> regularly it in the dev branch. You would have only to review the >> patches before applying to dev branch, but that's what you already do I >> think. The difference is just that actually you say, yes patch is ok we >> will apply it after feature freeze. Instead you would just have to apply >> if ok. > > Not true. There's a difference between doing a triage and actually > considering the patch for inclusion. In addition, "overviewing" means > discussing design and implementation for significant contributions. > Development is not just patch reviews, at least not in Emacs. You are already doing this, so it is not extra work. >> >> I think Emacs lost a lot a new features during this process, especially >> >> from contributors that send patches; most patches are lost or >> >> are unusable after several months of modifications in trunk. >> > >> > If you use bzr or any other dVCS, you can simply put your changes on a >> > branch or even a shelf, and then when the time comes to push them, you >> > will have much less trouble than you think. Modern VCSes do a very >> > good job at merging. >> I know this, I use patches that I can pop and push again after pulling >> last changes upstream. > > Then why do you present patch-rot as a significant factor? Most people don't want to do this and just do not contribute, so you lose many potentials contributors. > It isn't. It is actually not easy to contribute to Emacs. -- Thierry Get my Gnupg key: gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 59F29997