Your latest commits on emacs-25

Your latest commits on emacs-25

[Eli Zaretskii]

Mark, I don't understand why these commits: aa0d83a7, 0f332848, and
ac00a92e -- were pushed to emacs-25 and not to master.  The last one
was a very old bug, we've been living with it since 2009.  As for the
other 2, I'm not sure I understand what problem they are solving, let
alone why it was urgent to solve in 25.1.  Can you explain?

Thanks.

Re: Your latest commits on emacs-25

[John Wiegley]

>>>>> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

> Mark, I don't understand why these commits: aa0d83a7, 0f332848, and ac00a92e
> -- were pushed to emacs-25 and not to master. The last one was a very old
> bug, we've been living with it since 2009. As for the other 2, I'm not sure
> I understand what problem they are solving, let alone why it was urgent to
> solve in 25.1. Can you explain?

Yes, any changes to emacs-25 should be made very carefully at this point.

-- 
John Wiegley                  GPG fingerprint = 4710 CF98 AF9B 327B B80F
http://newartisans.com                          60E1 46C4 BD1A 7AC1 4BA2

Re: Your latest commits on emacs-25

[John Wiegley]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 822 bytes --]

>>>>> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

> Mark, I don't understand why these commits: aa0d83a7, 0f332848, and ac00a92e
> -- were pushed to emacs-25 and not to master. The last one was a very old
> bug, we've been living with it since 2009. As for the other 2, I'm not sure
> I understand what problem they are solving, let alone why it was urgent to
> solve in 25.1. Can you explain?

Hi Mark,

We haven't heard a response yet to our concern about making these changes on
emacs-25. If you could please let us know, that would be helpful; otherwise,
if there is no response by the end of the week, they will be reverted and
moved to master.

Thanks,
-- 
John Wiegley                  GPG fingerprint = 4710 CF98 AF9B 327B B80F
http://newartisans.com                          60E1 46C4 BD1A 7AC1 4BA2

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 629 bytes --]

Re: Your latest commits on emacs-25

[Mark Oteiza]

On 19/04/16 at 09:28am, John Wiegley wrote:
> >>>>> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> 
> > Mark, I don't understand why these commits: aa0d83a7, 0f332848, and ac00a92e
> > -- were pushed to emacs-25 and not to master. The last one was a very old
> > bug, we've been living with it since 2009. As for the other 2, I'm not sure
> > I understand what problem they are solving, let alone why it was urgent to
> > solve in 25.1. Can you explain?
> 
> We haven't heard a response yet to our concern about making these changes on
> emacs-25. If you could please let us know, that would be helpful; otherwise,
> if there is no response by the end of the week, they will be reverted and
> moved to master.

They were pushed to emacs-25 because they are very small fixes, and they
would be merged to master anyways.

AIUI emacs-25 is fine for safe changes; these are small fixes which had
patches on the list for some time (with the exception of aa0d83a, though
it is the same kind of fix as the other in rect.el).  If this is not the
case, please advise.

There has been much churn over what the purpose of the branches are, the
rationale of which was neither explained nor clarified on the relevant
thread on which I specifically recall mentioning what the status quo was
and asking why it was being changed.  It is pretty irritating to be
jumped on for what are perhaps the least intrusive pushes of those
I have made recently.

This reads to me like a great example of the magnitude of a change being
inversely proportional to the response--I would understand the inquiry
if the referenced commits were adding new features or breaking things.
They aren't, so alas, I don't understand it, and I can only hope there
is some misunderstanding.

Re: Your latest commits on emacs-25

[John Wiegley]

>>>>> Mark Oteiza <mvoteiza@udel.edu> writes:

> There has been much churn over what the purpose of the branches are, the
> rationale of which was neither explained nor clarified on the relevant
> thread on which I specifically recall mentioning what the status quo was and
> asking why it was being changed. It is pretty irritating to be jumped on for
> what are perhaps the least intrusive pushes of those I have made recently.

I hope I can clarify the current purpose of our branches:

  emacs-25: We're preparing this for release, so everyone should be very
  cautious. Even a safe fix, if not necessary, should go to master now.

  master: Work toward Emacs 26. Most changes should go here, but new API
  changes and new functionality should still not be introduced without some
  discussion on this list.

  feature branches: Commit anything you like, for review by others on this
  list.

When it comes to emacs-25, it's not that your change was improper, it's just
that a question was raised, and so it needed to be addressed.

I apologize if it sounded like you were being jumped on, that was not the
intent. It was purely out of caution for this branch -- a caution that will
continue to intensify as we approach the hopeful target of June 21.

-- 
John Wiegley                  GPG fingerprint = 4710 CF98 AF9B 327B B80F
http://newartisans.com                          60E1 46C4 BD1A 7AC1 4BA2

Re: Your latest commits on emacs-25

[Paul Eggert]

John Wiegley wrote:
>    emacs-25: We're preparing this for release, so everyone should be very
>    cautious. Even a safe fix, if not necessary, should go to master now.

The fixes in question look reasonably safe and localized. "Necessary" is often 
in the eye of the beholder; that being said, the fixes are all for bug reports 
that are recent or that have been pinged recently. I suggest leaving them in 
emacs-25.

Re: Your latest commits on emacs-25

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 21:28:45 -0400
> From: Mark Oteiza <mvoteiza@udel.edu>
> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
> AIUI emacs-25 is fine for safe changes; these are small fixes which had
> patches on the list for some time (with the exception of aa0d83a, though
> it is the same kind of fix as the other in rect.el).  If this is not the
> case, please advise.
> 
> There has been much churn over what the purpose of the branches are, the
> rationale of which was neither explained nor clarified on the relevant
> thread on which I specifically recall mentioning what the status quo was
> and asking why it was being changed.

AFAIU, the policy about the emacs-25 branch was stated by John here:

  http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2016-03/msg00648.html

It reads:

  I'd like to begin the period of final stabilization toward a 25.1 release
  before the summer (which would officially mean June 21st).

  This means that starting now-ish, the only commits that should appear against
  emacs-25 are those that address a serious problem, or are obviously safe and
  an improvement over something we don't want to appear in the release (typos,
  missing an option from a list of alternatives, etc).

  When in doubt about the relevance of a change, please ask here. Otherwise,
  changes outside this scope, but still intended for 25.x, should be queued in
  master toward 25.2, with some indication that it is to be cherry-picked into
  emacs-25 once the release has been cut.

HTH