[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Emacs-diffs] emacs-25 d4e1549: Guard terminal parameter in XTerm mo

From: Philipp Stephani
Subject: Re: [Emacs-diffs] emacs-25 d4e1549: Guard terminal parameter in XTerm mode
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 18:47:57 +0000


Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> schrieb am Mo., 28. Nov. 2016 um 16:51 Uhr:
Ping!  I still think this patch should be moved to master.

> >  > It's a very annoying and highly visible bug, and the fix is trivial and
> > cannot possibly break anything.
> >
> >  It wasn't reported until now, was it? So I guess it's only visible
> >  under some conditions that don't happen very often.
> >
> > It happens always when selecting text with the mouse in HTerm, I think that
> > happens very often. Perhaps
> > people just ignore the error message most of the time.

> Perhaps.  But that probably means it isn't urgent to fix, especially
> if we had this with us for quite some time.

> >  Can you tell since when do we have this bug? If it exists long
> >  enough, I don't think we should do this on the release branch, it goes
> >  against the criteria for bug fixes there.
> >
> > What are the criteria?

> As described here:

>   http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2016-10/msg00007.html
>   http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2016-10/msg00460.html
>   http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnu-emacs/2016-10/msg00787.html

> > CONTRIBUTE states
> > "Release branches […] are mainly
> > intended for more-conservative changes such as bug fixes. […]
> > If you are fixing a bug that exists in the current release, be sure to
> > commit it to the release branch; […]"

> That's a general policy, but Emacs 25.2 has special rules because we
> want to put it out the door very soon.

> > If the actual policy is different, please document it in CONTRIBUTE.

> I don't think it's right to publish ad-hoc criteria in CONTRIBUTE,
> that would be confusing to new contributors.

> > I've seen some talk about bugfix-only releases, but I think the policy should
> > be clearer and better documented
> > to avoid such discussions.

> I don't see any good alternative to reading the mailing lists, sorry.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]