Re: emacs-29 e2ac0d416b9 1/5: ; Merge from origin/emacs-28

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Stefan Kangas <stefankangas@gmail.com>
> Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2023 09:31:08 -0800
> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> 
> >>     ; Merge from origin/emacs-28
> >>
> >>     The following commits were skipped:
> >>
> >>     e339926272a Fix etags local command injection vulnerability
> >>     5d05ea803e9 Fixed ctags local command execute vulnerability
> >>     22fb5ff5126 Fix ruby-mode.el local command injection vulnerability 
> >> (b...
> >>     807d2d5b3a7 Fix htmlfontify.el command injection vulnerability.
> >>     ae9bfed50db Fix storing email into nnmail by Gnus
> >
> > Stefan, why did you merge from emacs-28 to emacs-29?  I think it's a
> > mistake: who knows what this brought to the release branch.
> 
> We know what this brought though?  You can see the full list of changes
> with "git diff", e.g.:
> 
>     git diff 068b53500e24b7b..ad6c6a3a11569c4

Why would we need to eyeball all those changes now?  It's a wasted
effort.  We never merge to the release branch, never.

> > If the reason was etc/HISTORY, I'd prefer making that change in
> > emacs-29 by hand instead.  Are there any other reasons?
> 
> Yes, ChangeLog.3, and AUTHORS too.

You will recreate those as part of tarring Emacs 29 anyway, so why
merge them?  And HISTORY change is a single line.

> What am I missing?

It is simply unnecessary risk, and something we never do, for very
good reasons.  I'd sleep better if you'd reverted those changes on
emacs-29, and made the single change in HISTORY by hand.