Re: Next release from master

[Óscar Fuentes]

Lars Ingebrigtsen <address@hidden> writes:

> Óscar Fuentes <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> Exactly. And developing features on `master' entirely bypasses the "it
>> works" phase, and that is a recipe for disaster.
>
> Uhm, no?  Presumably everybody tests stuff before they push it.

Yes, presumably... see my response to Kaushal Modi.

> No work, no push. And it's what we've been doing for... how many
> decades? Yet no disaster.

The Emacs developer community is outstanding by their quality. We also
have a few individuals who are well known for their bug-busting
habilities (and for devoting countless hours to that task.) We also have
looong pre-test and test phases, which acts as some type of hygiene that
prevents the project quality from sinking below certain line.

I'm not proposing a change on how Emacs is developed, I'm opposing the
proposed changed that consists on using `master' for changes that are
multi-commit, potentially destabilizing, and intrusive. That is, changes
that have a serious potential for annoying the community while being
hard to revert at the same time.

>> ** Some merges should require an approval by the maintainer. This is no
>>    different from how things are done now. See the cases of the xwidget
>>    branch, the ffi branch...
>
> Nobody is arguing against having separate branches for major new
> features.  But most features aren't so major.

Nor I'm arguin for having branches for minor changes, neither have I a
problem at all with you developing Gnus in `master' (speaking as a Gnus
user.)