On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 6:34 PM, David Nadlinger <[email protected]>wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 8:03 AM, Andrew Edwards <[email protected]> > wrote: > > On 2/24/14, 1:54 AM, Daniel Murphy wrote: > >> > >> I don't think merging back into master is feasible at this point. We > have > >> been merging fixes to master first, then cherry-picking/rebasing them > to the > >> release branch, and I don't think a merge to master is necessary or > >> desirable with this model. > >> > > Make sense to me. > > Please don't just skip over the entire earlier discussion like this. > > @Daniel: I'd argue that it is only really necessary and desirable > precisely in that model, because the Git history holds all the merging > information otherwise anyway. But I really thought we were done with > this discussion some weeks ago... > > If I understand correctly, your problem is that you are jumping from one release tag to the next, and the last tag will not be a parent of the new tag. Why can't you do the merge in two steps - merge up to the common ancestor, then create a 2.065 branch and merge the upstream release branch into that? > David > > _______________________________________________ > dmd-beta mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta >
_______________________________________________ dmd-beta mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta
