Re: Releasing small, not critical features as bugfixes

[emacsq <laszlomail@protonmail.com>]

>
> Famous last words. You'd be surprised at how much trouble seemingly
> innoculous changes can cause.

A change in show paren, for example, has some risk, but much less risk than changes in native compilation, for example.

People using this lower risk future branch would know they still use a testing branch, so they would expect occasional hiccups, of course.

> So that means we will have 3 branches actively diverging at the same
> time. Who will do the merges in between?

Code committers could tag their commits with some marker like "low risk" or such if they know their commits can work well as separate changes and and automatic process could merge these tagged changes automatically into this low risk future branch.

So practically this branch could be kept up to date automatically by a script, there would be no additional work for developers aside from optionally marking commits for this low risk branch if they think their changes can also go for early release.