Joe - do you mean you're committing to master and cherry-picking into next?
I think this would result in two identical-but-different changes appearing in the two branches, whereas checking into next and merging into master ends up with the same change appearing in both branches. The result of this (I think) is that cherry-picking will make history a bit more confusing, and increase the risk of future merges having conflicts. On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 1:52 PM, Joe Bowser <bows...@gmail.com> wrote: > That's assuming that we're fixing for release. I've been doing all > work in master at this point. I think we're fine doing both > cherrypicks and merging, but I think that's what makes this process > complicated. > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Filip Maj <f...@adobe.com> wrote: > > > >>Also, on a side note, for the release, if there's commits in master > >>that we want in this release, do we do a cherry pick into next? > > > > Yes. I see it the opposite way (I commit into next and merge into > master). > > >
