BTW: I noticed a couple of new commits (ba4b5d8cb1f9733d3901b0b619528454d3dbf8c8 & 2343daf29388566b0efa0b0a2ad21574fb534a27) where 3.0 is getting merged into feature branches. Almost every project I've been on we don't tend to do that as it leads to confusing history (this isn't just aesthetic, it can get harder for tooling to figure out what happened). If I want to pull changes from the main branch into my feature branch, I would typically *rebase* my feature branch against the main branch.
On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 12:05 PM, Scott Blum <[email protected]> wrote: > Yeah, 217 & 161 were the first two big things in 3.0. > > On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 9:53 AM, Jordan Zimmerman < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> OK - Also, is CURATOR-161 complete? The issue is still open in Jira. >> >> >> >> On August 24, 2015 at 12:47:21 AM, Cameron McKenzie ( >> [email protected]) wrote: >> >> Yes, I merged it in last week some time. >> >> On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 3:25 PM, Jordan Zimmerman < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >> > Scott, did CURATOR-217 get merged into the new CURATOR-3.0? >> > >> > -Jordan >> > >> > >> > >> > >
