I would have expected that the backport script would *only* look at the branch, as that is what would have to be merged once accepted.
Daniel? Bert -----Original Message----- From: "Philip Martin" <phi...@codematters.co.uk> Sent: 28-2-2015 14:39 To: "Branko Čibej" <br...@wandisco.com> Cc: "Subversion Development" <dev@subversion.apache.org> Subject: Re: 1.8.x backport conflicts bot is red Philip Martin <philip.mar...@wandisco.com> writes: > I could change the proposal > but I don't know if the backport script would then interpret Daniel's > vote for the other revisions as approving the whole backport: I don't think the backport script would do that but changing the proposal looks like the wrong thing: the 'missing' revisions are proposed for merge to 1.8.x just not from trunk. I suppose we could change the backport script to also look for 'missing' revisions in the commits made to the proposed branch. -- Philip
