[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: RFC: \hideNote
From: |
David Kastrup |
Subject: |
Re: RFC: \hideNote |
Date: |
Wed, 02 Nov 2011 11:17:26 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.90 (gnu/linux) |
Werner LEMBERG <address@hidden> writes:
>>> then I think it would be absolute cruelty to ask a new contributor
>>> to attempt the same.
>>
>> Well, yes. The staging problem in connection with merges remains,
>> but I would offer to do the process of making a suitable merge
>> commit with convert-ly. [...]
>
> A general question: Usually, my fixes in the last time are
> cosmetic-only ones (or minor documentation fixes). Is it OK to
> continue with directly committing them to git master?
It would be better to go through dev/staging instead. If you push to
master, master can no longer be fast-forwarded to dev/staging once
Patchy or anybody else decides that dev/staging is in good state.
Every time you do a push to master, it means somebody else has to rebase
the whole of dev/staging on your push. Usually it is easier for you to
rebase your small change on dev/staging instead, then push to staging
(which will be a fast-forward as well after your push).
--
David Kastrup
- Re: RFC: \hideNote, (continued)
- Re: RFC: \hideNote, David Kastrup, 2011/11/01
- Re: RFC: \hideNote, Kieren MacMillan, 2011/11/01
- Re: RFC: \hideNote, David Kastrup, 2011/11/01
- Re: RFC: \hideNote, Graham Percival, 2011/11/02
- Re: RFC: \hideNote, David Kastrup, 2011/11/02
- Re: RFC: \hideNote, Werner LEMBERG, 2011/11/02
- Re: RFC: \hideNote,
David Kastrup <=
Re: RFC: \hideNote, Adam Spiers, 2011/11/01
Re: RFC: \hideNote, Peekay Ex, 2011/11/01