[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: automake branch management

From: Jan Engelhardt
Subject: Re: automake branch management
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 21:19:25 +0100 (CET)
User-agent: Alpine 1.10 (LNX 962 2008-03-14)

On Friday 2008-11-28 20:37, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
>> When you graph git:// with `gitk --all` for example,
>> you may find that practice between 0.40--0.43 or 0.45--0.47.
>[...] Another thing that bothers me when merging from stable to
>master is that I'm not used to developing fixes on the stable

The motivation to manage it like this for pam_mount was that some
past releases had rather many regressions which prompted me to do a
bugfix-only branch.

>[...] Still, doing that makes history claim to have another 140some 
>changes incorporated which aren't in fact there.

If the code is already gone in master, that should be fine. It would
usually indicate that the 140 fixes have been incorporated one way or
another (and if that's replacing it by something new and shiny).

Alternatively, you could run a 3-branch setup — master, fixestoboth
and fixestocurrent, and only do the merge operations
master<-fixestoboth and fixestocurrent<-fixestoboth to avoid

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]