> From: Sean Whitton <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected], [email protected] > Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2026 16:35:13 +0100 > > 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.
If they use the released Emacs NN.1 instead, what's the difference? They will still see the regressions. > 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. I would hope (and expect, TTTT) people to start using Emacs NN.1 as soon as it is released. That's what I do. My production sessions always run the latest official release or a pretest of the next release.
