Re: patch vs. overwrite in bzr

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Thierry Volpiatto <address@hidden>
> Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2012 19:53:53 +0200
> 
> You should not have to overview the dev branch, only the trunk and merge
> regularly it in the dev branch. You would have only to review the
> patches before applying to dev branch, but that's what you already do I
> think. The difference is just that actually you say, yes patch is ok we
> will apply it after feature freeze. Instead you would just have to apply 
> if ok.

Not true.  There's a difference between doing a triage and actually
considering the patch for inclusion.  In addition, "overviewing" means
discussing design and implementation for significant contributions.
Development is not just patch reviews, at least not in Emacs.

> >> I think Emacs lost a lot a new features during this process, especially
> >> from contributors that send patches; most patches are lost or
> >> are unusable after several months of modifications in trunk.
> >
> > If you use bzr or any other dVCS, you can simply put your changes on a
> > branch or even a shelf, and then when the time comes to push them, you
> > will have much less trouble than you think.  Modern VCSes do a very
> > good job at merging.
> I know this, I use patches that I can pop and push again after pulling
> last changes upstream.

Then why do you present patch-rot as a significant factor?  It isn't.