From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: merge conlict? Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 10:49:53 +0900 Message-ID: <87ljfleita.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> References: <83vdeq634g.fsf@gnu.org> <83sk9u5wes.fsf@gnu.org> <87ljfm329g.fsf@telefonica.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1264470241 27538 80.91.229.12 (26 Jan 2010 01:44:01 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 01:44:01 +0000 (UTC) Cc: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=D3scar?= Fuentes , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jan 26 02:43:53 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1NZaSN-0005wq-3F for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 02:43:03 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35830 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NZaSO-0006IY-8V for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 20:43:04 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NZaSK-0006IQ-2Q for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 20:43:00 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NZaSE-0006GN-DU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 20:42:58 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=60073 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NZaSE-0006GG-8y for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 20:42:54 -0500 Original-Received: from mtps01.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp ([130.158.97.223]:50158) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NZaSC-0007qE-KN; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 20:42:52 -0500 Original-Received: from uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp [130.158.99.156]) by mtps01.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0060C1537B7; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 10:42:51 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 5DF9A11EF64; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 10:49:53 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: VM 8.0.12-devo-585 under 21.5 (beta29) "garbanzo" a03421eb562b XEmacs Lucid (x86_64-unknown-linux) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:120409 Archived-At: Richard Stallman writes: > If my guess is right, Mark merged trunk into his private branch, and > then pushed to upstream, which is very wrong. > > If we think this is wrong practice, can we customize something so that > it isn't allowed? No. Merging from trunk to branch is often very useful for any of several reasons, and merging from branch to trunk is necessary (that's how new code gets into trunk and becomes available to the community). It would be a very bad idea to forbid either kind of merge. Distinguishing between trunk->branch merges that are useful and those that merely create unreadable history (as displayed by bzr) requires fine judgment. Any automated gatekeeper would simply frustrate people working on branches (and maybe those working directly on the trunk, too, at least until the bugs are worked out).