Coordinating patches [was Re: Change in compile.el]

[Kim F. Storm]

Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:

> How is one supposed to know that a new version is in the works?  We
> don't really have a machinery for approving patches, so there's no
> good way to coordinate patches.

We have been discussing the new compile.el on the mailing lists.

Also, the patch you applied to keyboard.c also had a nasty bug which
I had already raised on the mailing list, and thus explained why it
should not be applied in its current form.  I was quite surprised
to see it installed anyway.

Given several incidents over the last few weeks where patches do more
harm than good, I think we need to tighten the procedure of applying
"3rd party" patches.  

What about this simple procedure:

Before applying a 3rd party patch, a message is sent to emacs-devel
with the subject:

        PATCH REVIEW: [title from original mail]

If no objections are received to that mail in 36 hours, you are
free to go ahead an install it.  

If it later turns out that there were problems with the patch anyway,
we are all to blame :-)

I know it is more work, but so is discussing and fixing the problems 
of a bad patch afterwards...


BTW we shall NOT follow this procudure for changes made by the project
members -- that would be very counter-productive.

-- 
Kim F. Storm <address@hidden> http://www.cua.dk