From: Jeff Trawick <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: 04/10/2012 09:18 AM Subject: Re: backports/merges
On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Jeff Trawick <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 2:17 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 4/9/2012 11:04 AM, Stefan Fritsch wrote: >>> On Monday 09 April 2012, Rainer Jung wrote: >>>>> Do you disagree with the procedure and/or my attempt to describe >>>>> the "normal" way this is handled? >>>> >>>> No, I agree and I think it is more useful to include the CHANGES >>>> entry in the backport commit than to split it in a second commit. >>>> At least that's what I tried to do in the past influenced by >>>> following the list and commit messages. Sometimes the CHANGES >>>> entry either is forgotten during the backport commit or postponed >>>> by a differing personal preference and is then added soon as a >>>> separate commit which I think is less useful but still acceptable. >>> >>> +1 >> >> +1; and ++1 for formalizing this at apr.a.o/dev/ > > I'll do that. (No, really!) Wow, I actually found a round tuit for something I said I'd do :)
