From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [jerome.marant@free.fr: Re: Possible help with stable Emacs releases.] Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 10:27:45 -0400 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <1096285717.4157fe159930b@imp1-q.free.fr> <1096291460.4158148407699@imp6-q.free.fr> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1096295346 25692 80.91.229.6 (27 Sep 2004 14:29:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 14:29:06 +0000 (UTC) Cc: "Kim F. Storm" , rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Sep 27 16:28:49 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1CBwUj-0004GB-00 for ; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 16:28:49 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CBwax-00014k-Re for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 10:35:15 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CBwam-00014d-Dw for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 10:35:04 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CBwak-00014I-Bf for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 10:35:03 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CBwak-000145-6v for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 10:35:02 -0400 Original-Received: from [132.204.24.67] (helo=mercure.iro.umontreal.ca) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CBwU2-00068q-2S; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 10:28:06 -0400 Original-Received: from hidalgo.iro.umontreal.ca (hidalgo.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.50]) by mercure.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id B53CAB3027A; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 10:27:51 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from asado.iro.umontreal.ca (asado.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.24.84]) by hidalgo.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1204C4AC5FD; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 10:27:46 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: by asado.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix, from userid 20848) id EC3328CA23; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 10:27:45 -0400 (EDT) Original-To: =?iso-8859-1?q?J=E9r=F4me_Marant?= In-Reply-To: <1096291460.4158148407699@imp6-q.free.fr> =?iso-8859-1?q?=28J=E9r=F4me?= Marant's message of "Mon, 27 Sep 2004 15:24:20 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.1006 (Gnus v5.10.6) Emacs/21.3.50 (gnu/linux) X-DIRO-MailScanner: Found to be clean, Found to be clean X-DIRO-MailScanner-SpamCheck: n'est pas un polluriel, SpamAssassin (score=0, requis 5), n'est pas un polluriel (inscrit sur la liste blanche), SpamAssassin (score=0, requis 5) X-DIRO-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-MailScanner-From: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 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 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:27615 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:27615 >> Actually, we already have "the RC branch" from which 21.2 and 21.3 came. >> So I agree to the extent that "Debian patches" should be applied to the RC >> branch of Emacs rather than just to the Debian Emacs package (assuming the >> fixes are sufficiently clean, of course). > It is much easier to create a new branch for every stable release: you > can then avoid the pain of CVS merges for the same cost (I'm not > inventing anything, GCC people do this). OK, it seems we're mis-communicating because I assume you know things you don't. "The" RC branch is the branch that's created when a new major release is made. I.e. when 21.1 was released, a new branch was created (EMACS_21_1_RC). From this branch were cut the bugfix releases 21.2 and 21.3. When 21.4 will be release a new RC branch will be created. I.e. right now there's a single RC branch for the simple reason that there's only been a single major release since we switched to CVS. But there will be more (but obviously at any point in time only one RC branch is active, because we don't have the manpower to continue releasing bugfix releases of several major versions). I.e. what you're suggesting is "what we already do" except that you're proposing to be more actively involved in maintaining the RC branch (and you suggest we call the revisions 21.1.N rather than 21.2, 21.3, ...). I think that any separately maintained set of patches is a waste of resouces, so of course I'd welcome it if Debian put their patches directly in the RC branch rather. Stefan