Felipe Contreras <felipe.contre...@gmail.com> writes:

>> So do you want to queue these on top of the "massive" in 'next', not
>> directly on 'master'?
> If they apply on master, master. But I'm confused, are the massive
> changes not going to graduate to master? Because if not, I should
> cherry-pick the safest changes, as there's a lot of good stuff there.

I think we discussed and agreed that we would ship it in 1.8.3 if we
hear positive feedback from Emacs folks, and my understanding is
that I was waiting for you to give me a go-ahead once that happens.

It is entirely up to you to add these two on top of that "massive"
stuff, their fate decided by feedback from Emacs folks, or apply
these as "much safer than those we need to hear from them; we can
verify their validity and safety ourselves without knowing the real
world projects that use the program" patches.

The impression I was getting from your response "I hear it breaks
for some of them without the patch but I haven't seen the breakage
myself" is that it is safer to group 2/2 as part of the rest of the
series, but as I heard in the same message that you heard Emacs
folks are happy with the entire series, so it wouldn't make much of
a difference either way.

Will apply these two to the tip of the "massive" stuff, and merge
the result before the next -rc.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to