From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Emacs 25.3 released Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 21:49:17 +0300 Message-ID: <83d16vpxaq.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87wp55t0un.fsf@petton.fr> <5defcc74-e4d2-57c9-3307-fe5f7ac66fb7@cs.ucla.edu> <83r2vbq2ph.fsf@gnu.org> <87efrbixj1.fsf@zigzag> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1505242205 6944 195.159.176.226 (12 Sep 2017 18:50:05 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 18:50:05 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Sep 12 20:50:00 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1drqFr-00018a-KK for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 12 Sep 2017 20:49:51 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38134 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1drqFy-0005CG-Nk for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 12 Sep 2017 14:49:58 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59341) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1drqFl-0005Ar-3E for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Sep 2017 14:49:46 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1drqFh-0006LU-VE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Sep 2017 14:49:45 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:45011) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1drqFh-0006LN-S0 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Sep 2017 14:49:41 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:2699 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1drqFf-0008CM-8Q for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Sep 2017 14:49:41 -0400 In-reply-to: <87efrbixj1.fsf@zigzag> (message from Thien-Thi Nguyen on Tue, 12 Sep 2017 20:26:10 +0200) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:218155 Archived-At: > From: Thien-Thi Nguyen > Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 20:26:10 +0200 > > I think the lag is important because it represents "attack > surface" (for FUD) to defend. Look at all the noise already > precipitated. Experience shows that noise is unavoidable, no matter what we do or don't do. Thus, the fact that there is noise proves or disproves nothing. > If those operations are not sufficient to get the repo in order, > then i suggest they be done prior to tarball publication, > anyway, but on a provisional branch. Afterwards, the proper > "getting the repo in order" operations can work w/ that branch > to merge it back to ‘master’ or whatever. Experience taught me that Git is tricky enough to cause even experience users of Git to make mistakes from time to time. And in this case even a slight risk of making a mistake was entirely unacceptable. So we've chosen a safer way, with Git issues out of the critical path. From my POV, the result was smashing success. > In sum: IMHO it's fine to deviate from full release protocol if > the deviation maintains transparency. When transparency is > lost, we need (annoying :-D) ml threads to find it again. The transparency was not lost, because the patch was posted here in advance.