On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 13:01:50 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 12:57:10 UTC, Andrew Edwards
wrote:
I which case, updating with master will be counter productive.
Thanks for the heads up. I will just have to rely on the devs
to cherry-pick what was not originally included in the branch.
cherry-picking is discouraged in that scenario as it will
complicate merging 2.065 branch back into master after release.
rebase sounds like best fit.
I'd argue that the release branches should be considered public
history and thus never rebased. You can always just merge master
into them...
David
