Superfluous J is correct, people are getting too heated up about this. (I used to have a game dev company so I know how this works)
As he says, there is a certain overhead for every patch, big or small. You have to test everything against every change, you may have broken something that wasn't even related to the fixes in the patch.
So there is a 'sweet spot' of the right number of fixes to incorporate and bundle up in to a patch. Only the devs are in a position to decide this.
Who would want a daily update with 1 fix, to take it to extremes? Equally, we don't want to wait 3 months. The right cadence is somewhere inbetween. I do agree thought that the focus should be in fixing all bugs that are blockers to the current features being used, not eye candy.
