Re: merge conlict?

[Óscar Fuentes]

Andreas Schwab <address@hidden> writes:

> Óscar Fuentes <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> You are not interested on bisecting my 3 commits branch that
>> implemented a small feature, are you?
>
> Sure I am.  If one of the 3 commits was the one that broke it.  That's
> the whole point of bisection.

And wouldn't you happy enough knowing the commit that merged the 3
commits into trunk?

It is very likely that if strict commit requirements are imposed on
private branches, people will refrain from doing local commits at
all. If you have to think hard and review and test before doing a local
commit, you will delay it as much as possible, or completely avoid
it. So, at the end, you have the same change on the left-most part of
trunk, but after removing the convenience of local branches, with the
subsequent impact on the fun/pace/relax people have hacking on Emacs.

Speaking as a newbie Emacs hacker, it is very encouraging to have the
possibility of working on some feature without worrying about breaking
things until the final point where the change is considered ready for
trunk. OTOH, having to keep every local commit up to trunk standards
looks very stressing. Not mentioning that most non-trivial new features
necessarily start on an unstable state.