Eli Zaretskii [27/Jun 3:49pm +03] wrote: >> From: Stefan Monnier <[email protected]> >> Cc: [email protected], [email protected] >> Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2026 08:20:44 -0400 >> >> >> No, no, I'm really talking about regressions introduced by the bug-fix >> >> patches installed in `emacs-NN`. IOW about the problems that show up >> >> when what we seemed like a "safe bug-fix" isn't. >> > >> > Then I don't think I understand what you are saying. If those >> > regressions are reported while emacs-NN is still active, we will >> > first try to fix them there. >> >> I'm saying they will tend to not be noticed because too few people run >> the code from that branch (after the NN.1 release), which means we have >> to be more conservative when trying to estimate whether a bug-fix is >> safe enough. > > I guess that depends on the workflows each one of us uses. I usually > try to reproduce on the release branch, as long as it is active (i.e., > as long as we haven't decided to have no more releases from it), even > if the bug is reported for the version on master, and if the problem > can be reproduced on the release branch, consider whether the fix is > safe enough to install there, rather than on master. YMMV, of course.
I think the point is that people stop running emacs-NN as their primary/main/ordinary build of Emacs as soon as NN.1 is released. Right now loads of people are running emacs-31 so regressions caused by fixes we've installed there are much more likely to be detected. -- Sean Whitton
