[Top][All Lists]

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

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

From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: Re: Coordinating patches [was Re: Change in compile.el]
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 21:43:42 +0200

> From: address@hidden (Kim F. Storm)
> Date: 17 Feb 2004 11:16:11 +0100
> We have been discussing the new compile.el on the mailing lists.

We are discussing a lot of things, many of them don't end in a patch
and not necessarily are meant to.  Even if code fragments are being
posted and discussed, there's no way to know that someone is actively
working on a change.

> 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.

Richard asked me to install it a long time ago, and I guess I've
missed your objections (and so did Richard, it seems, since he never
drew my attention to your objections).  As long as we rely on humans
to pay attention, these things can happen.

> 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.  

I don't have anything against formalizing patch approval (in fact, I
suggested long ago that we do that for _all_ non-trivial changes, but
was voted down).  However, when Richard or some other core maintainer
asks me to install a patch, I don't regard that as ``3rd party'', I'm
sure you understand why.

> 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.  

People who object to a patch can voice their objections as things are
today: simply assume that every patch suggested on one of the 3
mailing lists could be installed RSN.  In other words, if you care
about the quality of the CVS code, please take time to review patches
that ``3rd parties'' are posting on these 3 lists.  No need to wait
for an announcement that a certain patch is about to be installed.

reply via email to

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