why bugs only fixed in trunk?

why bugs only fixed in trunk?

[Leo]

One of the incentives to report bugs in the pretest is to have them
squashed before the release. Unfortunately it seems most bugs are just
fixed in trunk (which could mean wait another year for the fix) even if
reported against a pretest build.

Is there an implicitly agreed practice here?

Anyway, I think I am discouraged to report bugs and inclined to just
code a workaround in my .emacs.

Long ago I used to report bugs in the org mode that was bundled with
emacs but then the project's practice was to only fix in the development
trunk. So I save myself some time stop reporting bugs there.

Leo

Re: why bugs only fixed in trunk?

[Daniel Colascione]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 556 bytes --]

On 12/25/2012 5:19 PM, Leo wrote:
> One of the incentives to report bugs in the pretest is to have them
> squashed before the release. Unfortunately it seems most bugs are just
> fixed in trunk (which could mean wait another year for the fix) even if
> reported against a pretest build.
> 
> Is there an implicitly agreed practice here?

The trunk is in stabalization mode right now: only critical bugfixes and
regressions can go in. The sooner we get 24.3 out the door, the sooner we can
release a 24.4 with all the bugfixes you mention.




[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 258 bytes --]

Re: why bugs only fixed in trunk?

[Chong Yidong]

Leo <sdl.web@gmail.com> writes:

> Is there an implicitly agreed practice here?

The commit policy for the emacs-24 branch is to commit only fixes for
bugs relative to Emacs 23.

> Anyway, I think I am discouraged to report bugs and inclined to just
> code a workaround in my .emacs.

That is silly.

why bugs only fixed in trunk?

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

Leo writes:

 > One of the incentives to report bugs in the pretest is to have them
 > squashed before the release. Unfortunately it seems most bugs are just
 > fixed in trunk (which could mean wait another year for the fix) even if
 > reported against a pretest build.
 > 
 > Is there an implicitly agreed practice here?

Emacs is following best practice, AFAICS.  The only thing I personally
would do differently is to maintain a bugfix-only branch for the
previous release, but that wouldn't make a difference to your
situation.

If you want the most recent bug-fixes, the answer is obvious: use
trunk.

 > Anyway, I think I am discouraged to report bugs and inclined to just
 > code a workaround in my .emacs.

That seems self-defeating to me.  Not going to special effort to test
pre-releases would actually save you time, effort, and aggravation.

But apparently you're talking about not reporting bugs in a version
you are going to be using anyway.  It would take only a minute to
write a function that would copy the region containing the workaround,
open a bug report buffer, yank the copy into the bug report, and send.
It would take a minute per workaround to write a comment explaining
what infelicity is being addressed, making the .emacs code itself a
self-explanatory bug report.

 > Long ago I used to report bugs in the org mode that was bundled with
 > emacs but then the project's practice was to only fix in the development
 > trunk.

Completely different case, though.  It makes sense for a downstream
distributor to simply hand such bug reports back to upstream, and
resync when upstream releases.  Too much divergence of downstream from
any upstream branch just makes life a lot harder for everybody, to fix
a few bugs that don't matter much to most users, who would prefer an
earlier release and sync.

Re: why bugs only fixed in trunk?

[Jambunathan K]

> Anyway, I think I am discouraged to report bugs and inclined to just
> code a workaround in my .emacs.

I only hope that the threat doesn't materialize and stuff go on as
usual.
-- 

Re: why bugs only fixed in trunk?

[Xue Fuqiao]

On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 09:19:29 +0800
Leo <sdl.web@gmail.com> wrote:

> One of the incentives to report bugs in the pretest is to have them
> squashed before the release. Unfortunately it seems most bugs are just
> fixed in trunk (which could mean wait another year for the fix) even if
> reported against a pretest build.
You can use the trunk branch.

> Anyway, I think I am discouraged to report bugs and inclined to just
> code a workaround in my .emacs.
I think that it's a stupid behavior.

And there are some bug fixes in other branches, for example:
http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git/commit/?h=emacs-24&id=add2de3ef3911031d603315738f9c5de5533d9f4
http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git/commit/?h=xwidget&id=b1aa5d2fdc95f5e5e26dd99c2b8ba92d11900b4e
http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git/commit/?h=concurrency&id=e795e6f23528caaa6d1b125057c584a0c998a7d6
-- 
Best regards, Xue Fuqiao.
http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/XueFuqiao

Re: why bugs only fixed in trunk?

[Leo]

On 2012-12-26 14:28 +0800, Jambunathan K wrote:
> I only hope that the threat doesn't materialize and stuff go on as
> usual.

I hope you are not reading too much into my personal feelings. My
frustration with the practice only stems from my love for emacs if
nothing else.

Leo

Re: why bugs only fixed in trunk?

[Bastien]

Hi Leo,

Leo <sdl.web@gmail.com> writes:

> Long ago I used to report bugs in the org mode that was bundled with
> emacs but then the project's practice was to only fix in the development
> trunk. So I save myself some time stop reporting bugs there.

We all try hard so that all versions of Org are in an acceptable state.

There are mainly four versions:

1. Org in the bzr emacs-24 branch
2. Org in the bzr trunk branch
3. Org in the git maint branch
4. Org in the git master branch

I try to handle bugs from the bzr trunk and the git maint branches in
priority (as they are the "stable" versions), then from the trunk and
master (as "unstable" versions.)

I'm not syncing maint->emacs-24 and master->trunk regularily enough,
which might cause some frustration.  But in overall, the situation is
not that bad I think.

Let me know if you have any specific advice on how to make things
easier, either as a user or as a bug-reporter.

Thanks!

-- 
 Bastien

Re: why bugs only fixed in trunk?

[Leo]

On 2012-12-26 18:59 +0800, Bastien wrote:
> We all try hard so that all versions of Org are in an acceptable
> state.

Thanks for the update. My account of things was when Carsten was the
maintainer. Understandably he was/is highly overloaded. But I did start
using org from git.

Leo

Re: why bugs only fixed in trunk?

[Lars Ingebrigtsen]

Daniel Colascione <dancol@dancol.org> writes:

> The trunk is in stabalization mode right now: only critical bugfixes and
> regressions can go in. The sooner we get 24.3 out the door, the sooner we can
> release a 24.4 with all the bugfixes you mention.

Oops.  I didn't know that the trunk was in bugfix mode.  I assumed that
the emacs-24 branch was in bugfix mode, while trunk was open for new
features.

In that case, a couple of the things I've applied to trunk the past few
days should probably be reverted...

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
  http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no  *  Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen

Re: why bugs only fixed in trunk?

[Jay Belanger]

>> The trunk is in stabalization mode right now: only critical bugfixes and
>> regressions can go in. The sooner we get 24.3 out the door, the sooner we can
>> release a 24.4 with all the bugfixes you mention.
>
> Oops.  I didn't know that the trunk was in bugfix mode.  I assumed that
> the emacs-24 branch was in bugfix mode, while trunk was open for new
> features.

That's my understanding, too.

Re: why bugs only fixed in trunk?

[Bastien]

Jay Belanger <jay.p.belanger@gmail.com> writes:

>>> The trunk is in stabalization mode right now: only critical bugfixes and
>>> regressions can go in. The sooner we get 24.3 out the door, the sooner we can
>>> release a 24.4 with all the bugfixes you mention.
>>
>> Oops.  I didn't know that the trunk was in bugfix mode.  I assumed that
>> the emacs-24 branch was in bugfix mode, while trunk was open for new
>> features.
>
> That's my understanding, too.

Me too.

-- 
 Bastien

Re: why bugs only fixed in trunk?

[Daniel Colascione]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 634 bytes --]

On 12/26/12 8:59 AM, Bastien wrote:
> Jay Belanger <jay.p.belanger@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>>>> The trunk is in stabalization mode right now: only critical bugfixes and
>>>> regressions can go in. The sooner we get 24.3 out the door, the sooner we can
>>>> release a 24.4 with all the bugfixes you mention.
>>>
>>> Oops.  I didn't know that the trunk was in bugfix mode.  I assumed that
>>> the emacs-24 branch was in bugfix mode, while trunk was open for new
>>> features.
>>
>> That's my understanding, too.
> 
> Me too.
> 

Holiday distractions: I meant the emacs-24 branch above, not trunk.
The trunk is open.



[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 235 bytes --]

Re: why bugs only fixed in trunk?

[Leo]

On 2012-12-27 01:56 +0800, Daniel Colascione wrote:
> Holiday distractions: I meant the emacs-24 branch above, not trunk.
> The trunk is open.

Precisely why I am confused bug fixes not go to emacs-24.

Leo

Re: why bugs only fixed in trunk?

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Leo <sdl.web@gmail.com>
> Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2012 09:02:54 +0800
> 
> On 2012-12-27 01:56 +0800, Daniel Colascione wrote:
> > Holiday distractions: I meant the emacs-24 branch above, not trunk.
> > The trunk is open.
> 
> Precisely why I am confused bug fixes not go to emacs-24.

You mean, you also were confused due to holidays?